"How grateful I am to John Hammett and to Kregel Publications for

providing this revised, updated, and improved edition of Biblical Foun­

dations for Baptist Churches. While there was much to commend in the

initial version, this substantive work will become the primary source for

thinking about a Baptist theology of the church for the next generation

of students and pastors. Faithful to Scripture and informed by the best

aspects of Baptist thought through the years, Hammett has given us a

fresh, engaging, and thoughtful look at membership, leadership, polity,

baptism, the Lord's Supper, and all aspects of ecclesiology. I am delighted

to recommend this outstanding volume:'

-David S. Dockery, President,

Trinity International University/Trinity Evangelical Divinity School

"It is hard to improve on what had become the standard in the field.

However, this revised edition of Biblical Foundations for Baptist Churches

does exactly that. An excellent book is now even better. It is a joy to

commend it to all who want to better understand the important doctrine

of the church"

-Daniel L. Akin, President,

Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary

"I am delighted to welcome this revised edition ofJohn Hammett's superb

study of Baptist ecclesiology. Already a classic in the field, this book will

continue to introduce the principles of Baptist church life to a new genera­

tion. Highly recommended:'

- Timothy George, Founding Dean,

Beeson Divinity School of Samford University

"When John Hammett's Biblical Foundations for Baptist Churches appeared

in 2005, it was widely recognized as the most substantive contempo­

rary free church ecclesiology. In the last dozen years, the culture of the

churches changed while Hammett continued deepening his biblical stud­

ies. This second edition demonstrates again that Hammett continues to

offer the most substantive ecclesiology by bridging the biblical with the

contemporary:'

-Malcolm B. Yarnell III,

Research Professor of Systematic Theology,

Southwestern Seminary
"My favorite thing about John Hammett's Biblical Foundations for Baptist

Churches is that he combines both deep theological reflection on the

nature of the church with the practical nitty-gritty questions of pastoral

ministry. There's material for the academic to engage-but even more, he's

writing for the pastor and for healthy churches. You might not agree with

every conclusion, but John Hammett's ecclesiology is biblical, thoughtful,

historically-conversant, and respectful of other traditions, even while he

makes the case for a congregational, baptistic church:'

- Jonathan Leeman,

9Marks

"John Hammett has been laboring in the field of ecclesiology for years,

and this book is the abundant harvest of those labors. Faithful to Scripture,

conversant with church history and cultural context, rigorously systematic

in its structure, and lucid in its prose, this book deserves to be read by

students, pastors, and professors alike. Highly recommended:'

-Bruce Riley Ashford,

Provost and Professor of Theology and Culture,

Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary

 S E C O N D E D I T I O N

BIBLICAL

FOUNDATIONS
--FOR--

BAPTIST

CHURCHES
A Contemporary Ecclesiology

John S. Hammett

��Kregel

��Academic
Biblical Foundations for Baptist Churches: A Contemporary Ecclesiology

© 2005, 2 0 1 9 by John S. Hammett

All rights reserved. First edition 2005.

Second edition 2 0 1 9

Published by Kregel Academic, an imprint of Kregel Publications, 2450 Oak Industrial

Dr. NE, Grand Rapids, MI 49505-6020.

No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted

in any form or by any means-electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or oth­

erwise-without written permission of the publisher, except for brief quotations in

printed reviews.

All Scripture quotations, unless otherwise indicated, are from the Holy Bible, New

International Version®, NIV®. Copyright© 1973, 1978, 1984, 2 0 1 1 by Biblica, Inc.TM

Used by permission of Zondervan. All rights reserved worldwide. www.zondervan.com

Scripture quotations marked ESV are from The Holy Bible, English Standard Version®

(ESV®), copyright© 2001 by Crossway, a publishing ministry of Good News Pub­

lishers. Used by permission. All rights reserved.

ISBN 9 7 8 - 0 - 8 2 5 4 - 4 5 1 1 - 8

Printed in the United States of America

19 20 21 22 23 I 5 4 3 2 1
 CONTENTS

Figures 6

Preface to 2nd Edition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Preface 9

Introduction: Why This Book? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

PART 1: WHAT Is THE CHURCH?

1. The Nature of the Church: Biblical Foundations 25

2. The Marks of the Church: Historical Perspective 57

3. The Essence of the Church: Theological Conclusions

and Practical Applications. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75

PART 2: WHo Is THE CHURCH?

4. Regenerate Church Membership:

The Baptist Mark of the Church . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91

5. Where We Went Wrong and How We Can Get Right:

Returning to Faithfulness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117

PART 3: How Is THE CHURCH GovERNED?

6. Baptist Church Polity: The Case for Congregationalism 145

7. Meaningful Church Membership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173

8. Elders in Baptist Life: Leaders, Not Rulers 187

9. The Office of Deacon: Servants of the Church 221

PART 4: WHAT Doss THE CHURCH D o ?

10. The Ministries of the Church: Five Crucial Concerns 251

11. M o r eThan Simple Symbols: Baptism and the Lord's Supper. . 293

PART 5: WHERE Is THE CHURCH GOING?

12. Against the Grain: New Responses to a Changed Landscape . . . 343

13. Into All the World: The Future of the Global Church . . . . . . . . 367

Conclusion: A Call for Faithful Churches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 385

Scripture Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 388

Subject Index. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 392

 FIGURES

I.1: How to Do Theology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

1.1: Usage of the Term Ekklesia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

1.2: Summary of Implications of the Church as Family . . . . . . . . . . . 39

1.3: Summary of Implications of the Church as the People of God . . . 41

1.4: Summary of Implications of the Church as the Body of Christ. . . 49

1.5: Summary of Implications of the Church

as the Temple of the Spirit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

4.1: Regenerate Church Membership as Central

to Baptist Ecclesiology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116

5.1: How to Recover Regenerate Church Membership 136

5.2: J. Newton Brown's Church Covenant. 137

5.3: Saddleback Church Covenant 138

5.4: Capitol Hill Baptist Church Covenant 139

6.1: Episcopalian Church Government. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149

6.2: Presbyterian Church Government . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152

6.3: Congregational Church Government . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156

7.1: Theological Triage. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177

10.1: The Ministries of the Church in Acts 2:42-47 253

10.2: The Life Development Process 263

10.3: An Overview of "The Life Development Institute" 263

10.4: A Definition of True Worship 274

10.5: Four Suggestions for Improving Worship Services 276

10.6: The Two Keynotes of Worship 281

6
 PREFACE TO 2ND EDITION

&
IT HAS BEEN MORE than a decade since the first edition of this book appeared.

I have been grateful for the encouraging response to it, and do believe it has

been helpful to many churches, pastors, church leaders, and students. But

there have been a number of important changes in the ecclesiological world,

and the subtitle of my book, A Contemporary Ecclesiology, has been becom­

ing less and less fitting. And so I was very thankful that Dennis Hillman and

the fine folks at Kregel were open to the development of a second edition.

In the past ten years and more, there has been a welcome renaissance

in writings on ecclesiology, especially from a Baptist perspective. I have

attempted to revise my discussion in numerous chapters to interact with

these new sources and to incorporate where I have learned from them

and where my own thinking has deepened-and I hope, improved. Care­

ful readers will note minor changes throughout and more substantive

changes in chapters l. , 6, and 9.

I have also had the chance to do additional research and writing in

the past decade, particularly in the areas of church membership and the
1
ordinances of baptism and the Lord's Supper. That work is reflected in a

completely new chapter ( chapter 7, "Meaningful Church Membership")

and an expanded chapter 1 1 ("More Than Simple Symbols: Baptism and

the Lord's Supper").

1. See John S. Hammett and Benjamin L. Merkle, eds., Those Who Must Give an Account: A Study

of Church Membership and Church Discipline (Nashville: B & H Academic, 2 0 1 2 ) , and John S.

Hammett, 40 Questions about Baptism and the Lord's Supper (Grand Rapids: Kregel Academic,

2015).

7
8 PREFACE TO 2 N ° E D I T I O N

Finally, the cultural context in which the church must live and minister

has radically changed in the past decade. Some of the responses ten years

ago to the developing postmodern culture, such as the emerging church,

have almost completely disappeared, while new responses, such as the

missional church and multisite church, have become dominant. More­

over, the increasingly post-Christian culture of North America has become

evident in the increasing number of those who give "none" as their religious

affiliation, and in the overall decline in religious affiliation across the board,

including in my own denominational home, the Southern Baptist Conven­

tion. That has led to new approaches to ministry, such as the intentional

development of revitalization, the recognition that the church in North

America must take an increasingly missional posture, and work at contextu­

alizing the message of the gospel for a post-Christian culture. These changes

in culture led to a complete rewriting of chapter 1 2 and a new chapter title,

"Against the Grain: New Responses to a Changed Landscape:'

I hope these changes will allow this second edition to continue to

merit the subtitle of A Contemporary Ecclesiology, without sacrificing the

positive features that many appreciated in the first edition.

I especially want to express my gratitude for the support and encour­

agement I have received from my colleagues and the administration here

at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, for the encouragement and

ongoing dialogue with scholars at other seminaries and ministries like

9Marks, for the pastors who have read my book and sought to implement

some of the measures I recommend, and for the students who have read

my book and given feedback ( even if some of that feedback was required

for class assignments).

My secretary John May has worked with great patience in incorporat­

ing all the changes, additions, revisions, and revisions of revisions that this

second edition involved. I want to express my appreciation to him for his

diligence and servant spirit.

Most of all, my deepest gratitude goes to the Head, Lord, and Builder of

the church, the Lord Jesus Christ. Throughout my life, he has surrounded

me with churches that have enriched my life in ways beyond counting. I

offer this book in the hope that he would use it as part of his plan for his

church, "to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrin­

kle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless" (Eph. 5 : 2 7 ) . Amen.
 PREFACE

&
THIS BOOK HAS BEEN BREWING in my mind for close to twenty years.

Along the way, many people have contributed to it in some way. Most

important have been the ten churches on two continents and in five states

that have been my spiritual homes and the living laboratories in which I

have seen many of the principles of this book lived out. To those churches

collectively, I dedicate this book.

My theological mentors will be apparent from the footnotes and much

of the content of this book. I am grateful for the heritage of Baptist ecclesiol­

ogy, and have consciously sought to draw upon it. Sadly, much of that heri­

tage was ignored or forgotten in the twentieth century. I thank those who are

working to restore it; my debts to them will be seen in my use of their works.

Members of the churches where I have served, and colleagues and

students at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, have heard many

of these ideas. Collegial and classroom discussions have sharpened my

thinking on a number of points, and I am grateful for the interest of my

colleagues and students and their encouragement to present the ideas in

book form. However, that encouragement would probably have been lost

in the midst of academic responsibilities had it not been for the sabbatical

granted by the administration and trustees of Southeastern Baptist Theo­

logical Seminary for the calendar year 2004. I thank them for the gener­

ous gift of time that allowed me to complete my research and put ideas on

paper. Those ideas might have stayed on loose pieces of paper and never

appeared in print form without the expertise of Phyllis Jackson, Donna

9
10 PREFACE

Cooper, and Laura White. I thank them for their help in getting the manu­

script prepared for publication.

The staff at Kregel Publications, especially editor Jim Weaver, have

been more than helpful. I thank them for their willingness to publish a

denominational perspective in what is commonly regarded as a post­

denominational age.

My wife, Linda, has been the most faithful and fervent prayer supporter

of this project a husband could desire, and my children, Suzanne and

Michael, have prompted my prayers that this book will play a role in help­

ing to create for them and their generation a host of healthy and faithful

churches in which they will serve and be served.

Most of all, I thank the Lord of the church for calling me to be a part of

his bride. May this book contribute to the faithfulness of that bride.
 I N T R O D U C T I O N

WH Y THIS BOOIZ?

IN THE CONTEMPORARY information age, when books gush from publish­

ers, the Internet offers an endless flow of facts, and various forms of media

compete for our attention, it seems incumbent on anyone who writes a

book to answer the question on the minds of prospective readers: Why

should I read this book? This chapter attempts to answer that question,

and in so doing will give the reader an idea of what lies ahead.

First, I want to show that the church is God's creation, Christ's body,

and the special instrument of the Holy Spirit in the world today. Because

the church is so important to God, it should be a primary concern to

every Christian.

Second, I argue that understanding the doctrine of the church is espe­

cially important to contemporary North Americans, because their pragmatic

approach to church life, their concern to be relevant to their culture, and

their desire to see their churches grow leave them vulnerable to the danger

that their churches will be shaped more by those concerns than by the design

of the Lord of the church. Indeed, how can churches be what God desires

them to be if people do not know what he desires them to be? Thus, this book

will seek to ask the foundational theological questions that will help God's

people remain faithful to his ideals for the church, as revealed in Scripture.

Third, I want to make a case that, even in our postdenominational

age, there is a need for a book on the doctrine of the church from a Baptist

11
12 INTRODUCTION

perspective. Such a book will, I hope, be of some interest to those who are

not Baptists, either out of simple curiosity to understand more about the

largest Protestant denomination in North America, or out of a willing­

ness to examine Baptist claims that their doctrine of the church faithfully

represents what the Bible teaches. But I especially want to urge Baptists to

read this book, because I think few Baptists have a rationale for why they

are Baptist, or even realize what it means to be Baptist; and many Baptist

churches are hardly recognizable as Baptist churches in any historic sense.

Historically, Baptists have been Baptist not out of blind denominational

loyalty but because of their commitment to what they saw as biblical

teaching on the doctrine of the church. That doctrine has been central to

Baptist distinctives and was the motivating force behind our origin. It has

been largely lost over the past century and is worth recovering, because it

addresses critical needs of churches today.

WHY READ A B O O K ON THE CHURCH?

For all those who desire to know God, or for all those who are followers

of Christ, the church cannot be a matter of indifference. In the middle of

the third century the great North African church father Cyprian said, "You

cannot have God as father unless you have the Church as mother"! The great

Reformer John Calvin called the church "the mother of all the godly"? More

recently, in an article entitled "The Church: Why Bother?" Tim Stafford has

affirmed the same sentiment: ''A living, breathing congregation is the only

place to live in a healthy relationship to God. That is because it is the only

place on earth where Jesus has chosen to dwell." These comments reflect the

consistent New Testament teaching that Christianity is not an individualistic

enterprise but a corporate commitment. Christians and the church belong

together because the church is where the Christian life is born and nurtured.

For twenty centuries, most of those who have come to know the true and

living God have done so through some form of church ministry. Virtually all

Christians have lived out their Christian lives in connection with some form

of the church. That is why Hebrews 10:25 admonishes Christians to not give

up meeting together; they need the church. It is vitally important to them.

1. Cyprian, "On the Unity of the Church;' in Early Latin Theology, trans. and ed. S. L. Greenslade,

The Library of Christian Classics (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1956), 5: 127-28.

2. John Calvin, The Institutes of the Christian Religion, ed. John T. McNeill, trans. Ford Lewis Battles,

The Library of Christian Classics (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1960), 2 1 : 1 0 1 1 ( 4 . 1 ) .

3. Tim Stafford, "The Church: Why Bother?" Christianity Today 49, no. 1 (January 2005): 42-49.
WHY THIS B O O K ? 13

But as significant as the church is to Christians, the most important

reason for Christians to be passionate about the church is that the church

is God's passion. It is central to what God has been doing down through

history, creating a people for his own possession, a people who will be his

people, and for whom he will be their God. Early in the biblical story, we

see God calling Abram and promising that through him he would bless all

the families of the earth (Gen. 1 2 : 1 - 3 ) . Throughout the Old Testament we

see God forming Israel to be his people and, through them, bringing the

Messiah into the world. In the Gospels, Jesus gathers a group of disciples, but

does not yet call them the church. The story reaches a point of climax and

transition with the birth of the church on the day of Pentecost in Acts 2. The

coming of the Holy Spirit constitutes the church as God's new creation. The

New Testament letters picture the life and growth of the church, continuing

until the great purpose of God is fulfilled in Revelation 2 1 :3: "Look! God's

dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They

will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God:'

Virtually the whole Bible traces God's work of preparing for the church and

working in and through it. The church is of central importance to God.

Paul says that God's intent was that "through the church, the manifold

wisdom of God should be made known to the rulers and authorities in

the heavenly realms" (Eph. 3 : 1 0 ) . He goes on to say that God is eternally

glorified in the church: "to him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus

throughout all generations, for ever and ever" (v. 2 1 ) . Thus any book offer­

ing biblical teaching on the church should be of interest to anyone inter­

ested in the wisdom or glory of God.

The church is also central to why Christ came. He came to seek and

save the lost and then to gather them into a body. He said, "I will build

my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it" (Matt. 16:18).

Paul says, "Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make

her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and

to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or

any other blemish, but holy and blameless" (Eph. 5 : 2 5 - 2 7 ) . He calls all

those who love Christ to love his church as well, and to cooperate with

him in his great project of building the church. But how can we cooperate

with Christ in the building of the church if we do not understand what

he desires it to be? This book presents what Christ calls the church to be.

Further, the church is central to the presence of the Holy Spirit in the

world today. The writer of Luke and Acts does not use the term church
14 INTRODUCTION

(ekklesia) for the group gathered by Jesus until after the coming of the Holy

Spirit on the day of Pentecost, because it is the presence of the Spirit that

gives life to the church. The church is called "a holy temple . . . a dwelling in

which God lives by his Spirit" (Eph. 2 : 2 1 - 2 2 ) . The church is not the only way

the Spirit is present in the world, but he is uniquely present in the church.

As such, the church is uniquely empowered by God to minister in

the world. A recent survey estimated that Southern Baptist congregations

alone provide services such as food pantries and clothing closets to three
4
million people a month. Church members not only fund and voluntarily

staff many of the ministries of their churches, but church members also
5
donate two-thirds of the contributions given to nonreligious charities. In

so doing they reflect the working of the Holy Spirit in their lives and their

churches. Furthermore, according to the projections of Philip Jenkins,

the worldwide importance of the church is not decreasing but increasing,

6
and dramatically so in the Southern Hemisphere. The church survived

decades of oppression at the hands of communist rulers in Eastern Europe

and, though often not recognized as such, was an important factor in the

crumbling of the Iron Curtain. Today, the church continues to face perse­

cution in many parts of the world, in part because its power, the power of

the indwelling Holy Spirit, is not subject to political control.

All these factors should make the church a matter of intense concern

for all those interested in God and what he is doing in the world today.

WH Y RE AD A B O O K O N T H E

DOCTRINE OF THE CHURCH?

American culture is marked by pragmatism, and most books on the

church reflect that orientation. There are dozens of books on how to make

a church grow, how to organize and administer church programs, how

to revitalize a church's worship, how to get church members involved in

missions, how to do almost anything churches do. While I share these

pragmatic and practical concerns, in this book I focus on a different set

4. This data is from a survey of a representative sample of more than seven hundred Southern

Baptist congregations conducted in 2000, called Southern Baptist Congregations Today: A Survey

at the Turn of a New Millennium. The results of the survey are given in Philip B. Jones, "Research

Report: Executive Summary of Southern Baptist Congregations Today" (Alpharetta, GA: North

American Mission Board, SBC, n.d.), 3-4, available via www.namb.net.

5. Tim Stafford, "Anatomy of a Giver;' Christianity Today 4 1 , no. 6 (May 19, 1997): 19-24.

6. Philip Jenkins, The Next Christendom: The Growth of Global Christianity (Oxford, UK; New

York: Oxford University Press, 2002).

WHY THIS B O O K ? 15

of questions that are more fundamental to a church's long-term health,

questions that deal with the doctrine of the church. This is the branch of

theology called ecclesiology.

To most people theology is about as appealing as a root canal. Such a

view is unfortunate and inaccurate. There are problems with the health of

most churches that cannot be corrected by tinkering with the mechanics

of their programs. We need to do the important work of theology.

Since the church is God's creation, it must be ordered and operated

according to his instructions. Understanding those instructions is the task

of theology. It is not a task entrusted to an elite group of scholars, but all

Christians are commanded to love God with all their minds. Theology is

simply using our minds to know and love God. As one theologian put it,

"Theology is too important to be left to the theologians."

This work of theology begins with the study of God's instructions,

found in Scripture. This book will seek above all to be biblical in its

understanding and presentation of the doctrine of the church. But we

have help in understanding the message of the Bible from the twenty

centuries of Christians who have gone before us, many of whom sought

to understand the same Scriptures that we study. It would be foolish

and arrogant to despise the counsel of earlier generations. History has

much to teach us in understanding the Bible. At the very least, histori­

cal perspective can serve as a safeguard against the perennial danger of

allowing our own historical context and culture to distort our under­

standing of Scripture. For those engaged in the important task of seek­

ing to communicate the gospel to a post-Christian, biblically illiterate

culture, the laudable desire to address that culture in a relevant and

intelligible way carries with it the danger of allowing the culture to shape

and perhaps distort the message. History provides an anchor that can

guard against drifting with the currents of culture.

Today we have additional help in understanding the Scriptures from

the global community of believers. They read the same Scriptures, but

from a non-Western perspective. In many cases, they are closer to the

culture of the Bible than Western theologians and interpreters and have
8
insights to offer that Western theologians may miss.

7. W. Ward Gasque, back cover of Robert Banks, Redeeming the Routines: Bringing Theology to Life

(Wheaton, IL: Bridgepoint Books, 1993).

8. Books like Timothy Tennent, Theology in the Context of World Christianity ( Grand Rapids:

Zondervan, 2007) and E. Randolph Richards and Brandon J. O'Brien, Misreading Scripture with
16 INTRODUCTION

Scripture, informed by historical perspective thus forms the basis for

theology. Theology takes the data of Scripture, utilizes the help of history

and global insights, and develops doctrine to address the questions posed

by life as we seek to live for God in God's world in the contemporary

context. Such doctrine then serves as the basis for practical application in

concrete, real-life situations. The process of theology can thus be pictured

as a pyramid, in which theology is built on Scripture, is informed by

history and global insights, and serves as a platform for ministry.

Utilize in

Practical Ministry

Formulate Systematic Theology

Enrich Understanding with

Historical and Global Perspectives

Begin with Scripture

Figure 1 . 1 : How to Do Theology

The tendency among most evangelical Christians is to go straight

from Scripture to ministry without taking the necessary intervening steps.

This book follows the full process, beginning with and emphasizing Scrip­

ture as the sole normative source for theology. It, secondarily, draws upon

the resources of history, especially Baptist history and global insights, to

challenge and, at points, to correct contemporary assumptions. It develops

the major aspects of the doctrine of the church and includes examples and

suggestions of how such doctrine can and should be fleshed out in practi­

cal ministry in local church contexts.

The five parts of the book address the major theological issues involved

in the doctrine of the church, with each part organized around a central

question. The question for this introduction is, "Why this book?" Specifi­

cally, why read a book on the church? Further, why read a book on the

Western Eyes (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Books, 2012) are a couple of examples of the types of

insights we are receiving from global Christianity.

WHY THIS B O O K ? 17

doctrine of the church? Finally, why read a book on the doctrine of the

church from a Baptist perspective?

Part 1 asks the question, "What is the church?" It seeks to answer that

question in three chapters. The first chapter examines the New Testament

word for church (ekklesia), considers the major images for the church,

and describes the nature of the church as biblically conceived. Chapter 2

utilizes the resources of history, reflecting on the two major formulations

of the marks of the church. The classical formulation describes the church

as "one, holy, catholic, and apostolic;' and the Reformation sees the true

church as marked by the preaching of the Word and the right adminis­

tration of the sacraments. I consider what these formulations add to our

understanding of the church. From this biblical and historical material,

chapter 3 offers five theological conclusions on the essence of the church,

with each one leading to suggestions for practical application in church

life and ministry.

Part 2 turns to the question, "Who is the church?" Here I consider

what may be called the Baptist mark of the church-regenerate church

membership. Chapter 4 gives the biblical evidence for viewing the

church as a body of regenerate baptized believers, traces how that under­

standing was lost following the conversion of Constantine in A.D. 312,

and shows how it was recovered by Baptists and became the centerpiece

of their ecclesiology. Chapter 5 recounts the sad story of how that mark

of regenerate church membership was lost by Baptists in America in the

twentieth century, and considers how and why it should be regained,

involving changes in the practices of baptism, church membership, and

church discipline.

The question for part 3 is "How is the church governed?" Chapter

6 presents the case for congregational church government as the form

most consistent with New Testament teaching. Chapter 7 builds on the

emphasis of chapters 4 and 5 on regenerate church membership by look­

ing at how these regenerate church members live out their membership

in meaningful ways, especially considering the privileges and responsi­

bilities of church membership, with the latter being of special importance

for congregationalists. Chapters 8 and 9 present Baptist teaching on the

two offices of church leaders: those called elders or overseers or pastors,

and those called deacons. The important issues of the role, responsibility,

qualifications, number, and selection of these leaders are given a careful

and thorough consideration.

18 INTRODUCTION

Part 4 looks at the ministries of the church under the question,

"What does the church do?" Drawing on the important and paradigmatic

description in Acts 2:42-47, teaching, fellowship, worship, service, and

evangelism are affirmed as five essential ministries of the church in chap­

ter 1 0 . Chapter 1 1 presents a Baptist view of the ordinances of baptism and

the Lord's Supper, with some specific, practical suggestions for improving

how Baptists celebrate these important acts.

"Where is the church going?" is the final question, examined in part

5. Chapter 1 2 answers that question with the phrase "against the grain:'

That answer reflects the various responses churches are giving to the chal­

lenges presented by our changing cultural context. I give special attention

to what I see as the six most important responses churches are giving. The

final chapter, chapter 1 3 , broadens our vision by looking at the church

going into all the world, and considers some of the questions raised as

churches are planted in other cultures.

Each part of the book concludes with a list of study questions to help

the reader reflect on the issues raised in the preceding chapters, and an

annotated list of resources for further study, to assist those who want to go

into further depth on specific issues.

The book concludes, not with a question but a challenge-a challenge

to give ourselves to the cause for which Christ gave himself, the develop­

ment of radiant churches, fully pleasing to him. That requires first under­

standing what God desires his church to be and then working patiently

and lovingly to see that design embodied in our churches. Those inter­

ested in responding to such a challenge have ample reason to read a book

on the doctrine of the church.

WHY READ A B O O K ON THE DOCTRINE OF THE

CHURCH FROM A BAPTIST PERSPECTIVE?

While I have drawn doctrine first and foremost from Scripture, this

book does present a clear Baptist perspective on ecclesiology. In so doing,

I am countering the widespread postdenominationalism in our culture.

Increasingly, people are reticent to identify themselves by a denomina­

tional affiliation, preferring to be seen simply as Christian. But in practice,

it is hard to avoid making some denominational decisions. Even those

who join a nondenominational church will find that it either baptizes

infants or does not, it operates under a group of elders or it is ruled by the

congregation. It would seem reasonable to expect those who attend or join

WHY THIS B O O K ? 19

a church to understand their church's rationale for its practices. If I am a

Baptist, naturally I would want to understand my denomination's perspec­

tive on the doctrine of the church. But such an answer simply prompts a

deeper question: "Why be a Baptist?" At times I have asked my students

at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary or members of churches

where I speak to tell me why they are Baptists. I get a variety of answers.

Perhaps the most common answer is, "I am a Baptist because I was

raised that way; my parents were Baptists and that is all I have ever

known:' These individuals like the familiar Baptist literature and mission

agencies and traditional programs. But family background alone does not

provide a very strong reason for denominational affiliation. The proof of

that is the ease with which many Baptists switch denominations. When

they consider a church, they are likely to assign greater importance to the

style of music and worship, the quality of the preaching, and the variety of

the programs than to the denominational label.

Others say they are Baptists because it was in a Baptist church where

they first heard the gospel and recognized their need for a personal rela­

tionship with Christ, or that it was in a Baptist church that they were first

taught the Bible, or that it was a Baptist church that reached out to them

with love. Experiences like these produce a measure of denominational

loyalty, but a small measure only, for there are many churches of other

denominations that proclaim the biblical gospel, teach the Bible, and

reach out in love and, sadly, there are some Baptist churches that do none

of these things.

Some realize they have little denominational identity and see that as a

good thing. To the question, "Why are you a Baptist?" they answer, "I don't

really think of myself as a Baptist, but simply as a Christian:' As we noted

above, such an answer is characteristic of our postdenominational era and

of evangelical Christianity as a whole, which has been largely identified

with transdenominational parachurch groups. One such group, Promise

Keepers, even at one time identified denominationalism as a sin akin to

that of racism.

I have some sympathy with this answer. Certainly being a Chris­

tian is far more important than any denominational commitment, and

there have been all too many sinful, arrogant, and divisive expressions

of denominationalism. But, as we noted earlier, in the end, some type of

denominational identity is unavoidable. In practice, every church has to

answer certain questions. Should we baptize infants or believers only? Are

20 INTRODUCTION

we to be governed by a bishop, by a board, or by the congregation? What

type of practices do we believe are appropriate for worship? Is each church

connected to others, or does each church have a measure of autonomy?

The answers provided to these questions and others like them align an

individual and a church, to some degree, with a denomination, or at the

least, place them within a denominational tradition. So, while not the

most important issue or essential to salvation, the question of denomina­

tional affiliation is not irrelevant or unimportant.

To the question, "Why are you a Baptist?" a well-informed Baptist

will reply, "because I interpret Scripture as teaching Baptist positions

on the traditional ecclesiological questions." Such an answer need not

be arrogant, or presume that Baptists have a monopoly on truth, or

imply that Baptists are the only true Christians. Rather, it recognizes

that since the Reformation, Christians-even Christians of deep piety

and genuine love for Christ and commitment to his Word-have not

been able to reach agreement on the interpretation of Scripture on

certain issues regarding what the church is and how it is to function.

These disagreements led to the formation of different denominational

traditions. These differences in interpretation endure to this day and

present choices every thoughtful Christian must face. Thus any book

on the doctrine of the church must present a perspective that is, to

some degree, denominational. The perspective presented in this book is

Baptist because I agree with how Baptists historically have interpreted

the key ecclesiological issues.

To the question with which we began this section, "Why read a book

on the doctrine of the church from a Baptist perspective?" there are

several answers. For those who are not Baptists, this book will explain

9. There have been a number of books in Baptist history that have given answers to the question,

"Why a Baptist?" One of the earliest and most famous is J. M. Pendleton, Three Reasons Why

I Am a Baptist, with a Fourth Reason Added on Communion (St. Louis, MO: National Baptist

Publishing, 1856). His reasons all dealt with Baptist ecclesiology. Others, such as Louis Devotie

Newton, Why I Am a Baptist (New York: Nelson, 1957); Joe T. Odle, ed., Why I Am a Baptist

(Nashville: Broadman, 1972); Cecil P. Staton, ed., Why I Am a Baptist: Reflections on Being

Baptist in the 21st Century (Macon, GA: Smyth & Helwys, 1999); and Tom Nettles and Russell

Moore, Why I Am a Baptist (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2 0 0 1 ) , include ecclesiological

reasons to some degree, but some also deal with family influence and appreciation for other

aspects of Baptist life. Another book that sees some relationship between Baptist ecclesiology

and Baptist identity is R. Stanton Norman, More Than Just a Name: Preserving Our Baptist

Identity (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2001). Norman followed that book up with another,

connecting the same two themes: The Baptist Way: Distinctives of a Baptist Church (Nashville:

Broadman & Holman, 2005).

WHY THIS B O O K ? 21

the basis for Baptist identity, which has centered around their doctrine

of the church. Whether one traces the origin of modern Baptists to the

early sixteenth-century Anabaptists or the early seventeenth-century

English Separatists, the key issue for both groups was the same: their

belief in the church as a pure gathered group of believers only. Most

other Baptist distinctives grow out of their doctrine of the church. It may

well be that some non- Baptists who read this book will be provoked to

reconsider their interpretation of scriptural teaching on the church and

perhaps revise some of their views.

For those who are Baptists, simple curiosity could be a motivation

for reading this book. Most Baptists, and even many Baptist pastors, have

never carefully thought through the biblical rationale for historic Baptist

views and practices. Indeed, one of the main reasons prompting the writ­

ing of this book was the recognition that most Baptists are unaware of

their ecclesiological heritage, in part because until very recently, there

have not been many books that address the doctrine of the church from a

Baptist perspective." This book can help to confirm and strengthen many

in their Baptist identity by showing them the strong basis for that identity.

Other Baptists, especially Baptist pastors, may be led to read this book

because they sense that many of our churches are wandering, tossed to

and fro by passing fads, suffering from problems that go beyond indi­

vidual, isolated acts to shoddy doctrinal foundations. In the past century,

Baptists as a whole seem to have forsaken many of their historic posi­

tions, with little awareness of the slippage. The doctrine presented in

this book accurately reflects biblical teaching, is deeply rooted in Baptist

history, is intensely practical and applicable in Baptist churches today, and

is urgently needed if Baptist churches are to be the radiant bride of Christ.

This concern for the welfare of the church motivated the writing of this

book; I hope it will motivate many to read it.

10. In the years since the first edition of this book (2005), there have been a number of works helping

to fill that gap. Mark Dever and Jonathan Leeman have jointly edited Baptist Foundations:

Church Government for an Anti-Institutional Age (Nashville: B & H Academic, 2 0 1 5 ) , and have

each individually written books on ecclesiological topics. Among their contributions are Mark

Dever, The Church: The Gospel Made Visible (Nashville: B & H Academic, 2012) and Jonathan

Leeman, Don't Fire Your Church Members: The Case for Congregationalism (Nashville: B & H

Academic, 2 0 1 6 ) . Thomas White, Jason G. Duesing, and Malcolm B. Yarnell III edited Restoring

Integrity in Baptist Church ( Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2008 ); and as part of the series Foundations of

Evangelical Theology, Gregg Allison's work Sojourners and Strangers: The Doctrine of the Church

(Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2 0 1 2 ) reflects his Baptist ecclesiology.

22 INTRODUCTION

STUDY QUESTIONS

1 . W h i c hof the reasons given for the importance of the church seems

most significant to you? How important is the church? Can someone

be a Christian and not be involved in any church?

2. What questions do you have about the doctrine of the church that

you hope this book will answer? Write them down and review them

after reading this book to see if your questions were addressed.

3. What is your own denominational affiliation? Why? How important

is it to you? Could you see yourself becoming a member of a church

of a different denomination? Why or why not?

 PART 1

WHAT IS THE CHURCH?

 C H A P T E R

T H E N A T U RE O F T H E C H U R C H

Biblical Foundations

IN THIS CHAPTER, AND THE two that follow, we address the question that

must be the starting point for any doctrine of the church: "What is the

church?" In everyday language, we use the word church in a variety of

ways. Quite often, we refer to the church as the building where we meet

("We're going to the church"). Some groups apply the term church to their

denomination (the United Methodist Church). More knowledgeable

Christians know that the church is more than a building or denomina­

tion-it is people. But simply stating that the church is people, or even

God's people, does not go very far. What is the church?

For two thousand years, in hundreds of cultures and languages,

divided into a multitude of denominations, thousands if not millions of

groups of Christians have assembled under the name of "church:' Some

have certainly been far healthier than others. Some have been closer to

what Baptists see as the New Testament pattern than others. What makes

a group a church, as opposed to a club, a Bible study, a fellowship group,

or even a parachurch group? What is the nature of a church? What marks

identify it in the world? What is the theological essence of a true church?

25
26 CHAPTER I

Our concern in these first three chapters is to discuss these fundamental

and foundational issues. Other issues, which are crucial but relate more to

the well-being or health or proper order of the church than to its being or

nature, will be treated in the following chapters.

Since Baptists are people of the Book, a Baptist approach to the nature

of the church begins with Scripture. In this chapter, we-first of all-explore

the teaching of Scripture on the nature of the church. Then, respecting the

witness of history, we examine in chapter 2 the major historic formulations

of the marks of the church. Then, since doctrine is the basis for ministry, we

draw upon our findings from Scripture and history to present theological

conclusions and practical applications concerning the essence of the church.

THE CHURCH AND THE OLD TESTAMENT

Looking to Scripture for our understanding of the nature of the church

requires us to face the difficult question of the relationship of the church

to the Old Testament and the people of God in the Old Testament, Israel.

Some Christians, especially those who identify with covenant theology,

emphasize the continuity of the church with Israel and thus find much

in the Old Testament to inform our thinking on the nature of the church.

As Reformed theologian Edmund Clowney puts it, "the Old Testament

people of God become the church of the Messiah, formed as the fellow­

ship of the Spirit. The Bible does not deliver shipments of doctrine in

cargo containers. Rather, the new grows out of the old, as the flower opens

from the bud." Baptist author and pastor Mark Dever states: "In order

to understand the church in the full richness of God's revealed truth, we

must examine both the Old and New Testaments."

The Old Testament allows us to see the historical rootedness of the

church, going back to the call of Abraham, who is not only the father of

Israel, but the father of all those who share his faith. Paul describes Abra­

hams offspring as not only "those who are of the law" (Israel) but also

"those who have the faith of Abraham, (the church), concluding, "He is

the father ofus all" (Rom. 4 : 1 6 ) . Th e church is also included in Gods great

plan to call for himself a people, identified in both the Old and New Testa­

ment as "the people of God" This is seen perhaps most clearly in 1 Peter

2:9, in which four phrases used to describe Israel in the Old Testament

1. Edmund Clowney, The Church (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1995), 29.

2. Dever, The Church, 3.

THE NATURE OF THE CHURCH 27

("a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God's special posses­

sion") are now applied to the church.

Thus, those taking a covenantal view emphasize continuity between

the Old Testament people of God and the New Testament people of God.

Clowney affirms, "The story of the church begins with Israel, the Old Testa­

ment people of God:' The question of whether the church fully replaces

Israel in the purposes of God or not is, in the words of one covenant theo­

logian, "variously answered;' with some seeing the language of extension,

continuation, or growth out of as a better description of the relationship of

3
the church and Israel. Millard Erickson, for example, describes the church

as "the new Israel;' which "occupies the place in the new covenant that

Israel occupied in the old:' Yet he also affirms "a special future coming for

4
national Israel:'

Others, taking a more dispensational view of things, think we should

also recognize a significant degree of discontinuity. Classical dispensa­

tional theology insisted on a radical or complete discontinuity between the

church and Israel, but more recent formulations, as in progressive dispen­

sationalism, allow for a measure of continuity, seen in matters such as the

use of the phrase "people of God" to refer to both Israel and the church,

but insist that it is important to still maintain a distinction between Israel

and the church. For Robert Saucy, the fact that "similar terminology"

can be used for Israel and the church does not justify "a continuity of the

people of God which views the church as the <new Israel?" Gregg Allison

argues that since "certain constitutive elements of the church;' particularly

the baptism of the Holy Spirit, awaited the ascension of Christ and the

outpouring of the Spirit, we should see the church as beginning at Pente­

cost. He says, "the church began at Pentecost and did not exist prior to that

event, though the people of God did exist and flourish:' But the people

3. Marten H. Woudstra, "Israel and the Church: A Case for Continuity," in Continuity and

Discontinuity: Perspectives on the Relationship Between the Old and New Testaments, ed. John

S. Feinberg (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 1988), 237. For a full examination of what is called

"replacement theology;' or supersessionism, see Michael Vlach, Has the Church Replaced Israel?

A Theological Evaluation (Nashville: B & H Academic, 2 0 1 0 ) .

4. Millard Erickson, Christian Theology, 3'<led. (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2 0 1 3 ) , 966.

5. Robert Saucy, "Israel and the Church: A Case for Discontinuity;' in Continuity and Discontinuity:

Perspectives on the Relationship between the Old and New Testaments, ed. John S. Feinberg

(Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 1988), 249. Gregg Allison argues for a similar "moderate discontinuity

position;' seeing "significant disparate elements" which prevent eliminating distinctions between

Israel and the church, and insisting that "the church has not replaced Israel nor fulfilled all of the

promises made to Israel" (Sojourners and Strangers, 88-89).

28 CHAPTER I

of God under the old covenant must be distinguished from the people

of God under the new covenant, and the latter could not exist until the
6
former had passed away.

Recognition of discontinuity is not limited to dispensationalists.

Historian and theologian Gerald Bray, from an Anglican background,

gives several reasons why we «probably should not . . . include Israel under
7
the umbrella term of 'church: " For Bray, the «final and most theological of

the differences between Judaism and Christianity" is the deeper relation­

ship Christians had with God: «They had access to the Father, through the

Son, in the Holy Spirit. They were born again." Seeing the discontinuities

as greater than the continuities, Bray writes, «we must therefore conclude

that Israel cannot really be regarded as the Old Testament church. The

continuities between the Old and New Testaments were refracted through

the prism of Christ, who changed everything."

The influence of dispensational thinking on Baptist ecclesiology may

be seen in the wording of the article on the church in the Baptist Faith

and Message, which begins, "A New Testament church;' which seems to

assume a significant discontinuity between the church and the Old Testa­
10
ment people of God. But historically, there have been Baptists on both

sides of the continuity/discontinuity, or covenantal/dispensational debate,

and Baptist ecclesiology is not wedded to one or the other.

The position adopted in this book attempts to recognize a measure of

both continuity and discontinuity. The church did not spring completely

out of nothing; it is in some way rooted in and connected to the Old

Testament people of God. But I share with Gregg Allison the conviction

that something unique happened at Pentecost that was in some ways a

culmination of what had been taking shape during the ministry of Jesus,

whose presence makes for another element of discontinuity. My analogy is

that the conception of the church occurred with the call of Abraham. The

6. Allison, Sojourners and Strangers, 82.

7. Gerald Bray, The Church: A Theological and Historical Account (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2016), 17.

8. Ibid., 23

9. Ibid., 24. Bray cites as an example of the dramatic nature of the change wrought by Christ the

testimony of the apostle Paul in Philippians 3:4- 7. Bray adds, "it would be hard to find a clearer

statement of why Israel and the church were not just the same thing in a clearer guise;' 3.

10. That this wording is deliberate may be seen in the fact that The New Hampshire Confession,

after which the Baptist Faith and Message was patterned, begins the article on the church with

the phrase, "a visible Church of Christ;' rather than "A New Testament church:' See William

Lumpkin, Baptist Confessions of Faith, rev. ed. (Valley Forge, PA: Judson Press, 1969), 365, 396.
THE NATURE OF THE CHURCH 29

entire period of the Old Testament following the call of Abraham is the

gestation; the period of Iesuss earthly ministry is the time of labor, with

the birth of the church occurring on the day of Pentecost.

THE TERM EKKLESIA

We turn now to the word used for church in the New Testament,

ekklesia. What was it about this word that led early Christians to apply it

to themselves, and what did they mean by it?

Most scholars today agree that the best way to decipher the meaning

of a word is by looking at how it is used, rather than looking at its etymol­

ogy, or origin. Still, the origin of ekklesia is interesting. It is formed from

two Greek words, ek, "out:' and kaleo, "to call:' Thus, the ekklesia are "the

called-out ones:' In ancient Greece, the ekklesia was the assembly of the

called-out citizens, who came together to conduct the business of the city.

But over the years, the element of being called out became less promi­

nent, and an ekklesia was regarded as just an assembly of people." Still,

it is worth noting that the element of being called out lies in the back­

ground of the biblical word for the church. One scholar points out that it

seems unlikely that this idea of being called out was not at least part of the
12
reason why the early Christians chose this word for their gatherings. As

we will see below, the New Testament teaching on the church does high­

light the idea of being called out, and that idea was implied in the origin

and ancient usage of the word.

For New Testament concepts like the church, however, the most impor­

tant background is not etymology or ancient Greek usage, but the Old

Testament. Here, we look to the use of ekklesia in the Septuagint, the Greek

translation of the Old Testament. There are two primary Hebrew terms that

are used to refer to God's people in the Old Testament: cedah and qiihiil.

The translators of the Septuagint used ekklesia to translate qiihiil a

13
total of seventy-three times, but never to translate cedah. For cedah they

usually used the Greek term synagoge, which is used only once in the New

11. This usage is reflected in Acts 19:32, where a riotous crowd came together and is called an

ekklesia, an assembly. Such an assembly is then contrasted with a legal assembly in verse 39

(ennomii ekklesia), one that would be formally convened to conduct civic affairs.

12. Paige Patterson, "The Church in the 21st Century" (privately published paper, n.d.), 5.

13. I. Howard Marshall, "New Wine in Old Wine-Skins: V. The Biblical Use of the Word 'ekklesia;"

Expository Times 84 ( 1 9 7 2 - 7 3 ) : 359.

30 CHAPTER I

14
Testament to refer to the church (James 2 : 2 ) . What does this association

with qanat. but not cedah, say about the meaning of ekklesia?

While both cedah and qahdl can be used in a variety of senses (secu­

lar as well as religious), the most important distinction seems to be that

qiihiil "embraces only those who have heard the call and are following it.

'edah, on the other hand, is the permanent community into which one

was born?" In designating themselves ekklesia, the early Christians were

taking a word already in use by Greek-speaking Jews to refer to the people

of God in the Old Testament, and thus making a claim to some degree of

historical connection to that earlier people; they were also using a word

that reinforced the idea that the church is made up of those summoned or

called by God. They avoided the term synagoge, which was occasionally

used to translate qdhdl, probably because by the New Testament era, that

word was strongly associated with the Jewish law and temple, which made

it a problematic term to use for the New Testament church.

Perhaps we should not seek to derive too much of the meaning of

ekklesia from its Old Testament antecedents. I. H. Marshall argues "in

the N. T. the doctrine of the ekklesia owes little to the theological use of

the corresponding terms in the O.T. but has undergone a transformation

as a result of new associations and ideas?" At the same time, when we

turn to the actual New Testament usage of ekklesia, we find at least one

element of the etymological and Old Testament background confirmed.

K. L. Schmidt sees the idea of being called out as central to New Testa­

ment teaching on the church: "Ekklesia is in fact the group of men called

out of the world by God even though we do not take express note of the
17
ek," referring to the etymology of the term. The very term called (kletos)

is found several times as a virtual synonym for ekklesia. Paul describes the

church in Rome as those "called to belong to Jesus Christ" and "called to

be his holy people" (Rom. 1 : 6 - 7 ) . The church in Corinth is said to be those

who are "called to be his holy people" ( 1 Cor. 1 : 2 ) . On the day of Pentecost,

the gift of the Holy Spirit was promised to all those whom God called to

himself. The church comes into being, not by any human initiative, but in

14. See the discussion by L. Coenen, "Church:' in New International Dictionary of New Testament

Theology, ed. Colin Brown (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1975), 1:292-96.

15. Ibid., 295.

16. Marshall, "New Wine:' 359.

17. K. L. Schmidt, "ekklesia]' in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. Gerhard Kittel,

trans. and ed. G. W Bromiley (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965), 3 : 5 3 1 .

THE NATURE OF THE CHURCH 31

response to a divine call. Beyond this central idea, there is some variety in

the New Testament usage of ekklesia.

The term is found in the New Testament 1 1 4 times. Of these, three

refer to a secular assembly and two refer to the Old Testament people of

God. The remaining 1 0 9 verses refer to the New Testament church. More

than half of these, sixty-two, are found in Paul's writings. There are twenty

references to the church in Revelation, nineteen in Acts, and a few in

Hebrews, James, and 3 John. Noteworthy is the surprising lack of refer­

ences to ekklesia in the Gospels. The only three references are found in

two passages in Matthew (Matt. 1 6 : 1 8 ; 1 8 : 1 7 ) . These are historically and

18
theologically important passages, but they are only two and both seem to

look to a future situation. The implication is that the church was not given

birth until after Christ's earthly ministry.

The 1 0 9 occurrences of ekklesia are usually seen as referring to the

church in two senses, local and universal. The overwhelming majority

point to local churches, actual assemblies that gather and act. We find

them moving quickly toward order and organization, with leadership

established (Acts 1 4 : 2 3 ) and membership recognized, such that Luke can

report the numerical growth of the church, from three thousand ( 2 : 4 1 ) to

five thousand (4:4) and beyond ( 9 : 3 1 ; 1 6 : 5 ) .

There is some variation in nomenclature for church leaders. Elder (pres­

byteros) is the term used most often (Acts 14:23; 15:4, 22), but bishop or over­

seer (episkopos) is also found (Acts 20:28; Phil. 1 : 1 ), along with deacon ( 1 Tim.

3 : 8 ) . The most commonly used term among Baptists today, pastor, is used

only once (Eph. 4: 1 1 ) . A discussion of the roles, functions, and significance

of these leaders and the related issues of church government would take us

well beyond the bounds of this chapter and so will be deferred until part 3.

However, it does seem that the church, as portrayed biblically, is not just any

group of people, even any group of Christians. It is an organized assembly.

18. In Matthew 16: 18, Jesus calls Peter petros, and says that he will build his church on a rock (petra). The

relationship of Peter to the petra on which the church is built has been the subject of controversy.

The traditional Roman Catholic interpretation has seen Peter as the rock, thus establishing the

importance of the papacy, but such an interpretation requires that Jesus be referring to Peter,

that Peter had a line of successors, that those successors would be the bishops of Rome, and that

Peter's foundational role was transferred to them. More likely are interpretations that see Peter's

confession of Jesus as the Christ as the rock on which the church is built, or Peter himself as the

rock, not as the bishop of Rome, but as the leader of the apostles, whose teaching collectively was

foundational for the church (see Eph. 2:20). Matthew 1 8 : 1 7 has been important in ecclesiology as

the most often cited basis for the practice of church discipline.
32 CHAPTER 1

These churches gather to act in a variety of ways. They gather to worship

(Acts 13:2-3; 1 Cor. 14:23ff.), which seems to include prayer (Acts 12:5;

13:3; 1 4 : 2 3 ) , reading of Scripture (Col. 4 : 1 6 ; 1 Tim. 4 : 1 3 ) , teaching from

the leaders (Acts 2 0 : 2 8 - 3 1 ; Eph. 4 : 1 1 ; 1 Tim. 3:2), and the Lord's Supper

( I Cor. 1 l : 1 8 ff . ) . They enjoy fellowship within the local assembly and with

other local churches (Rom. 1 6 : 1 6 ) . The church serves widows and the needy

( 1 Tim. 5: 16; 1 Cor. 16: 1 ) . Believers are involved in spreading the gospel, both

personally (Acts 8:2-4) and through those sent by the church (Acts 1 3 : 2 - 3 ) .

These ministries emerge without fanfare, exhortation, or command. It is as

if such ministries are part of the very nature of the church. Churches are not

passive or static; they are dynamic, purposeful assemblies.

In addition to references to the local church, there are at least thirteen

references (nine in Ephesians) that seem clearly to refer to the church in a

universal sense, as all the redeemed of all the ages. These passages contain

some of the most exalted descriptions of the church, seeing it perhaps as

it will be at the consummation (Eph. 5 : 2 3 - 2 7 ) , or even as it is now in

the mind of God (Eph. 3 : 1 0 , 2 1 ) . A number of these passages contain the

biblical teaching on Christ as the head of the church.

Local and universal is the most widely used terminology for the

twofold meaning for ekklesia found in the New Testament. Some refer to

the dichotomy as visible and invisible. Some even reserve the term Church

( with a capital C) for the universal church, and refer to local assemblies as

congregations. However, in view of the predominance of the local church

in New Testament usage, it seems more fitting to translate ekklesia as

church (with a lowercase c), assuming the local church meaning and then

noting the exceptions when it has the universal meaning.

Moreover, there may need to be a third sense, in addition to local and

universal. For example, when Paul says he persecuted the church of God

(I Cor. 1 5 : 9 ; Gal. 1 : 1 3 ; Phil. 3 : 6 ) , it wasn't just one church he targeted,

though he began with the church in Jerusalem (Acts 8 : 3 ) . Neither does it

seem that any individual could persecute the universal church. What Paul

persecuted was the church in general, any church.

Finally, the idea of local church must be seen with some flexibility.

While a group small enough to meet in a house is called a church (Rom.

1 6 : 5 ; Col. 4 : 1 5 ) , Paul also consistently refers to the church in a city in the

singular ( the church in Cenchrea or Philippi or Corinth, the church of the

Thessalonians; see Rom. 1 6 : 1 ; 1 Cor. 1 :2; Phil. 4: 1 5 ; 1 Th e s s . 1 : 1 ), but to the

churches in a region in the plural ( the churches of Galatia or Asia or Mace-

THE NATURE OF THE CHURCH 33

donia; see 1 Cor. 1 6 : l , 19; 2 Cor. 8: 1 ) . Today we see a multiplicity of churches

in virtually every city, large or small. To speak of the church in Raleigh, for

example, sounds a bit odd, and could only have a rather nebulous meaning

for us. What are we to make of the New Testament pattern on this point?

First, we need to remember the historical situation. Christians in any

city were a very small minority. In contrast to their pagan neighbors, they

felt a sense of oneness with any fellow Christian. It was only centuries later

when Christians held a much stronger position in society that differences

of interpretation led to division, with churches existing in separation from

and, in many cases, in opposition to, other churches. Today, perhaps in

response to the sense of hostility many Christians feel from contemporary

North American culture, Christians are recovering something of this sense

of oneness across denominational lines, particularly in evangelical para­

church groups. In any case, there is nothing in New Testament usage that

implies that the oneness of the churches in a city was organizational or insti­

tutional, or put any one local assembly under the authority of a larger body.

A second factor involved in the use of church (singular) for all the Chris­

tians in a city is that these Christians may have gathered together ( see 1 Cor.

1 1 : 1 8 ; Col. 4 : 1 6 ) . Even the church at Jerusalem, which numbered several

thousand from Acts 2 onward, is reported as gathering and acting together

(Acts 1 1 :22; 1 2 : 5 ) . There are even four interesting references to what is called

the whole church in a given city (Acts 5 : 1 1 ; 15:22; Rom. 16:23; 1 Cor. 1 4 : 2 3 ) .

Perhaps there were both house church meetings in some of these cities, and

occasional larger group meetings of all the Christians in the city. In any case,

where geographical distance clearly prohibited meeting together, Paul used

the plural, referring to churches in this way twenty-one times. This pattern

of using the singular "church" for all the Christians in a city, even when

they may have met in a network of smaller house congregations, will call for

further consideration in a later chapter when we consider the contemporary

movement called multisite churches. Some such churches meet in a variety

of locations, spread out across a city, and sometimes beyond a city, and yet

claim to be "one church in many locations?"

A third factor that should be remembered is that there is nothing in

this pattern of usage of ekklesia that justifies calling a local group a congre-

19. "One Church in Many Locations" is the phrase used to describe a multisite church in Geoff

Surratt, Greg Ligon and Warren Bird, The Multi-Site Church Revolution: Being One Church in

Many Locations (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2006). This movement will be examined in closer

detail in chapter 12.

34 CHAPTER 1

gation and reserving the term church for a larger grouping of congrega­

tions. Indeed, since Paul referred to geographically separated congrega­

tions as churches and to the smallest house congregations as churches,

there is a strong basis for what Baptists have traditionally referred to as

local church autonomy, the idea that a local congregation should not be

ruled by a larger organization called the church. Rather, each local congre­

gation is fully ekklesia in itself. These various usages of the term ekklesia

may be summarized as follows.

• Two times ekklesia is used with reference to the Old Testament

congregation.

• Three times it is used for a secular assembly.

• Six times it is used in a general or nonspecific sense.

• Thirteen times it is used for the universal church.

• Ninety times it's used with reference to a local church or churches, assem­

blies that have a degree of order and purposefulness in their gatherings.

• Forty times it is found in the singular, for a local church.

• Fourteen times it is used for all the Christians in a city.

• 36 times ekklesia is used in the plural for local churches.

Figure 1 . 1 : Usage of the Term Ekklesia

In a few cases, it is not immediately obvious in what way the word

is being used; most of these fit in the category of general or nonspecific.

There could even be differences in opinion in a few cases about whether a

particular verse should be seen in a local or universal sense. But the overall

pattern is clear and unmistakable. The focus in New Testament usage is on

local churches.

IMAGES OF THE CHURCH

Biblical teaching on the church is not limited to passages contain­

ing the term ekklesia. Indeed, it could be argued that the primary way

the Bible teaches us about the church is through the numerous images

or metaphors of the church found throughout the New Testament." The

20. The fullest exposition of this is Paul S. Minear, Images of the Church in the New Testament

(Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1960). He lists ninety-six possible images of the church in

the New Testament, but many are not well supported by Scripture; some do not seem to be

an image and others do not refer to the church at all. Of these ninety-six, Minear recognizes

four as "master images:' They are "people of God, new creation, fellowship in faith, and the
THE NATURE OF THE CHURCH 35

church is pictured as the bride of Christ, as the family of God, as the new

creation, and in several other ways. Biblical teaching on the church seems

to cluster most fully around four of these images: family, people of God,

body of Christ, and temple of the Spirit. We will thus consider them in

some detail, as they communicate a variety of insights concerning the

nature of the church.

The Family

At first glance, family may not seem to warrant much attention as an

image for the church. The noun "family" is almost never used to refer to
21
a church in the New Testament, and the related words for "household"
22
( oikos, oikeios) appear only a handful of times as an image for the church.

But there are other terms to consider. One so common that we tend to

overlook it is God the Father.

God is called Father more than 250 times in the New Testament, and

Jesus teaches his followers to address God as "Our Father in heaven" ( Matt.

6 : 9 ) . Indeed, J. I. Packer sees this teaching of God as Father as distinctive

and central to New Testament teaching and New Testament religion: "If you

want to judge how well a person understands Christianity, find out how

much he makes of the thought of being God's child, and having God as his

Father?" But becoming God's child is not a status every person receives at

birth, but is something given to those who receive Jesus (John 1 : 1 2 ) . They

become children of God by adoption. As the people of God the Father, the

church is his family.

Jesus hinted at this in the Gospels, identifying those who do the

will of God as his "brother and sister and mother" (Mark 3 : 3 5 ) . This

seems to look forward to the church being a family. Similar language

is increasingly used of the church in the book of Acts. Although the

term "brother/s" can be used to refer to those in the same blood family

body of Christ" ( 2 5 9 ) . I see the first and last as central images, but combine his second and

third in a different way.

21. The 1984 edition of the NIV translated oikos in 1 Peter 4 : 1 7 as "family;' but the 2 0 1 1 edition

has "household;' as do all other major contemporary translations (ESV, HCSB, NRSV, NASB,

NKJV). The 2 0 1 1 NIV and 1999 NRSV translate oikeios in Galatians 6:10 as "family;' but other

translations have "household:'

22. First Timothy 3 : 1 5 is the most explicit, but Galatians 6 : 1 0 , Ephesians 2 : 1 9 , 1 Peter 2:5, and 1

Peter 4: 17 also seem to refer to the church, either a local church or the church in a general or

universal sense.

23. J. I. Packer, Knowing God, 20th anniversary ed. (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1993), 201.
36 CHAPTER 1

(Acts 1 : 1 4 ) or to fellow Israelites (Acts 2 : 2 9 ) , the dominant use, espe­

cially as groups of believers develop throughout the book of Acts, is

24
for a believer or group of believers. But the use of family terminology

becomes especially prominent and pervasive in the epistles. Paul uses

adelphos/oi (brother, brothers) 1 3 4 times, and adelphe (sister) five times.

On a very few occasions Paul uses such terminology to refer to fellow

Jews (Rom. 9 : 3 ) or a physical, blood brother (Gal. 1 : 1 9 ) , but overwhelm­

ingly these terms are used to refer to fellow Christians. And though adel­

phoi is masculine in form, it is used collectively for a group of male and

female believers, and is translated by some versions as "brothers and

sisters;" others give "brothers" as the translation and give "brothers and

25
sisters" as the meaning in a footnote. When the fifty-eight uses of adel­

phos/ oi and two uses of adelphe in the remaining epistles and Revelation

are added, the New Testament refers to fellow believers as brothers and

sisters more than two hundred times.

When the references to the church as a household, the references

to God as the Father of believers, and the references to believers as

brothers and sisters are added together, they become so pervasive "that

the comparison of the Christian community with a 'family' must be

26
regarded as the most significant metaphorical usage of all:, The sibling

terminology for fellow believers becomes especially significant when

the first-century Mediterranean context is understood. Two aspects of

that context are crucial for the New Testament understanding of the

church. As Joseph Hellerman puts them, "In the New Testament world

the group took priority over the individual," and "In the New Testament

world the closest family bond was not the bond of marriage. It was the

bond between siblings?" Hellerman is not saying that the sibling bond

should be closer than that of marriage. In view of New Testament teach­

ing on marriage, I do not think he would do so. His point is that when

24. Of the fifty-seven occurrences of adelphos/oi in Acts, thirty-three seem to refer to a believer or

group of believers.

25. The 2 0 1 1 NIV is an example of the former approach; the ESV of the latter.

26. Robert Banks, Paul's Idea of Community: The Early House Churches in Their Historical Setting

(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980), 53.

27. Joseph Hellerman, When the Church Was a Family: Recapturing Jesus' Vision for Authentic

Christian Community (Nashville: B & H Academic, 2009), 50. The same points are made by

S. Scott Bartchy, "Divine Power, Community Formation, and Leadership in the Acts of the

Apostles;' in Community Formation in the Early Church and the Church Today, ed. Richard

Longenecker (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2002), 93. Both Hellerman and Bartchy cite the work

of Bruce Malina, Christian Origins and Cultural Anthropology (Atlanta: John Knox, 1986).
THE NATURE OF THE CHURCH 37

Paul and the other writers of the New Testament chose a word to refer

to the relationship between fellow Christians, the word they overwhelm­

ingly chose was the word that denoted the strongest bond that existed in

their culture. In Hellermans words, "in light of ancient Mediterranean

cultural sensibilities;' the use of sibling terminology indicates that "Jesus

wanted His followers to interact with one another like members of a

strong-group, surrogate family characterized by collectivist solidarity

and commitment on every front'?"

What implications does the image of church as family have for our

understanding of the nature of the church? First of all, it speaks to the

depth of relationship church members have with God. They have been

adopted into his family. J. I . Packer argues that while justification may be

the fundamental blessing of the gospel, adoption is the highest blessing.

He writes: "Justification is a forensic idea, conceived in terms of law, and

viewing God as judge:' By contrast, "Adoption is a family idea, conceived

in terms of love, and viewing God as father:' He concludes: To be right with

God the Judge is a great thing, but to be loved and cared for by God the

Father is a greater?" Packer goes on to expound adoption as "the norma­

tive category" for the entire Christian life, as that which shows us "the

greatness of God's love" ( 1 John 3 : 1 ) , as that which shows us "the glory of

the Christian hope; . . . the ministry of the Holy Spirit; . . . the meaning and

motives of what the Puritans called 'gospel holiness;' [and] "the problem

of Christian assurance?" In fact, to fully explore the riches of the doctrine

of adoption would take an entire book; those who are interested in going
31
further can consult such books.

But second and perhaps even more important for individualistic

North Americans, seeing fellow church members as brothers and sisters

in the New Testament sense would profoundly impact the relationship

church members have with one another. From his examination of how

Paul uses the family imagery in his letters, Hellerman derives four impli­

cations. The first he calls "Affective Solidarity . . . the emotional bond

that Paul experienced among brothers and sisters in God's family:' In

28. Hellerman, When the Church Was a Family, 75.

29. Packer, Knowing God, 207.

30. Ibid., 209, 214.

31. See Trevor Burke, Adopted into God's Family: Exploring a Pauline Metaphor, NSBT 22 (Downers

Grove, IL: Inter Varsity Press, 2006); Robert A. Peterson, Adopted by God: From Wayward Sinners

to Cherished Children (Phillipsburg, NJ: P & R, 2001); and David B. Garner, Sons in the Son: The

Riches and Reach of Adoption in Christ (Phillipsburg, NJ: P & R, 2016).

38 CHAPTER 1

simpler terms, it means "We share our hearts with one another'l" The

second is "Family Unity . . . the interpersonal harmony and absence of

33
discord that Paul expected among brothers and sisters in God's familf'

Scott Bartchy adds that among surrogate kinship groups characteristic

practices included "truth telling" and "open homes to all in the extended
34
kin group;' practices that would help preserve family unity. The third

implication is "Material Solidarity . . . the sharing of resources that Paul

assumed would characterize relationships among brothers and sisters

in God's family?" This is especially evident in Acts 2 and 4, especially

in the example of Barnabas, whose sale of a piece of land and delivery

of the money to the family via the apostles shows this material solidar­

ity, which Hellerman more plainly states as, "We share our stuff with

one another'?" The last implication drawn by Hellerman is "Family

Loyalty . . . the undivided commitment to God's group that was to mark

the value system of brothers and sisters in God's family?" Rather than

hopping around from church to church as free agents, seeing ourselves

as members of a family means, "We stay, embrace the pain and grow up

with one another":" Undergirding this family loyalty is a sense of shared

destiny, the recognition that we are not just family for the short time of
39
this life, but that we are truly a forever family.

A third implication we may draw from the church as family is the

inseparability of salvation and church membership. When we are born

again, we are born into a family. As one of my colleagues puts it, we are

saved from sin, for God, into a family and unto a mission." Hellerman

calls on us to recognize that conversion involves both justification and

what he calls "farnilification," and argues that we should see personal

salvation as a "community-creating event?" When we see the church as

family, we realize that not belonging to it is not an option.

32. Hellerman, When the Church Was a Family, 78, 145.

33. Ibid., 78.

34. Bartchy, "Divine Power, Community Formation, and Leadership in Acts:' 94.

35. Hellerman, When the Church Was a Family, 79.

36. Ibid., 145.

37. Ibid., 79.

38. Ibid., 145.

39. Bartchy, "Divine Power, Community Formation, and Leadership in Acts:' notes, "Throughout

the Acts narrative, the Jesus community remains highly energized by a sense of common

purpose and shared destiny:'

40. I heard this from my colleague, Dr. George Robinson.

41. Hellerman, When the Church Was a Family, 143.

THE NATURE OF THE CHURCH 39

1. The church as family means we have a deeper relationship with God;

not merely pardoned criminals, but adopted and beloved children.

2. The church as family calls on us to treat fellow members as brothers

and sisters, showing affective solidarity, family unity, material solidar­

ity, and family unity.

3. The church as family means there can be no separation between

conversion and church membership; conversion is a community­

creating event.

Figure 1 . 2 : Summary of Implications of the Church as Family

The People of God

In 1 Peter 2 : 9 - 1 0 , the church is addressed using terminology from the

Old Testament. The church is "a chosen people . . . God's special possession

. . . the people of God;' drawing upon the descriptions of Israel in Exodus

1 9 : 5 - 6 ; Deuteronomy 4:20; 7 :6; Hosea 1 : 1 O; 2:23; and dozens if not hundreds

of places throughout the Old Testament where God calls Israel "my people:'

What does this image add to our understanding of the nature of the

church? It connects the church to the Old Testament people of God, and

sees the church as involved in God's great purpose of calling to himself a

people, while leaving open the question of whether or not there is also a

future purpose for ethnic Israel. The people of God image is also consis­

tent with the idea of the church as the called-out people, for God's people

become his people as a result of his call. This image can also serve as a

corrective to the strong individualism in American society, for it reminds

us that the church is a people, not a collection of isolated individuals. Most

important of all, the people of God image reminds us that the church is

much more than a human institution. Eleven times the church is called
42
"the church of God:' God called it and God relates to it; the church is

shaped in every way by its relationship to God.

For example, the God of the Bible is a holy God, and thus his people

must be a holy people. God's called-out people are also "called to be his holy

people" (Rom. 1 : 7 ) . More than sixty times God's people are called saints or

42. See Acts 20:28; 1 Corinthians 1 : 2 ; 1 0 : 3 2 ; 1 1 : 1 6 ; 1 1 : 2 2 ; 1 5 : 9 ; 2 Corinthians 1 : 1 ; Galatians 1 : 1 3 ; 1

Thessalonians 2 : 1 4 ; 2 Thessalonians 1:4; and 1 Timothy 3:5. By comparison, there is only one

reference to "the churches of Christ" (Rom. 1 6 : 1 6 ) .

40 CHAPTER 1

holy ones (hagioi). This in no way implies that they have attained a state of

sinless perfection; "holy" means first of all to be specially set apart for Gods

purposes. God summons his people out of the world to devotion to him. But

the call to be holy in devotion includes a call to be holy in behavior.

It seems significant that one of the two places in the Gospels where

Jesus discusses the church includes the process by which the church was to

take action to exclude an unrepentant sinner (Matt. 1 8 : 1 5 - 1 8 ) . Similarly,

Paul insists that the church in Corinth must expel the wicked man from the

church ( 1 Cor. 5 : 1 3 ) . Because God is holy, the people of God must be holy.

But the holiness of God in Scripture is matched by his love. First John

4:8 says simply "God is love," Indeed, a succinct summary of Gods character

could be holy love, or loving holiness. Love for God and neighbor is identi­

fied by Jesus as the most important commandment (Matt. 22:37-39), but

love is especially the mark of the church as the people of God. Early on, Jesus

commanded his disciples to love one another, and promised that this would

identify them to the world (John 1 3 : 3 4 - 3 5 ) . In 1 John, one of the grounds

for believing that one is part of the church is love for the brethren ( 1 John

2 : 9 - 1 0 ; 3 : 1 0 , 14; 4:7-8, 19-20). Christians are commanded seventeen times

in the New Testament to "love one another" and the record of history indi­

cates early on a widespread obedience to that command. By the late second

century Tertullian could claim that even the opponents of Christians noted

this, saying, "See, they say, how they love one another?" In his classic study,

Evangelism in the Early Church, Michael Green says that the love of Chris­

tians for one another "astonished the pagans" and was a large factor in their

evangelistic success." Because the church is the people of the God who is

himself love, its members must be characterized by love.

As the people of God, the church is the people of the Triune God. We

mentioned above the significance of seeing the church as the people of

God the Father, in connection with the image of the church as a family.

Now we want to reflect on the church as the people of the other two

persons of the Trinity.

Christ the Son is God as well, and the church is his people too. The

church is those who respond to Gods call by trusting Christ. God's people

in Ephesus are called "the faithful in Christ Jesus" (Eph. 1 : 1 ) ; at Colossae

43. Tertullian, "Apology:' 39, in The Ante-Nicene Fathers, eds. Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson

(Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1868-72; reprint, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1 9 5 1 ) , 3:46-47.

44. Michael Green, Evangelism in the Early Church (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1970), 120.
THE NATURE OF THE CHURCH 41

they are called "God's holy people . . . the faithful brothers and sisters in

Christ" (Col. 1 : 2 ) . In the book of Acts, the church is referred to as "believ­

ers" in Christ, "disciples" of Christ, and, ultimately, as "Christians" (Acts

2:44; 1 1 : 2 6 ) . They are clearly the people of God the Son.

The people of God are also the people of God the Holy Spirit. Indeed,

it is the coming of the Spirit that transforms the disciples of Jesus into the

church. Perhaps the most distinctive reflection of the church being the

Holy Spirit's people is his gift of fellowship. The New Testament term for

fellowship, koinonia, is not found in Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, or Acts

1 . However, once the Holy Spirit comes in Acts 2, we find fellowship in the

first description of the life of the early church ( v. 4 2 ) . In the apostolic bene­

diction of 2 Corinthians 1 3 : 1 4 , while grace is associated with Christ, and

love with God the Father, fellowship is "of the Holy Spirit:'

1. It gives the church a connection to the Old Testament and God's great

purpose of calling to himself a people.

2. It underscores the nature of the church as called-called by God to

be his people.

3. The church is a people, not a collection of isolated individuals.

4. The church is God's people, not a human institution.

• As God's people, the church is called to be holy and loving.

• As God the Father's people, the church is a family.

• As God the Son's people, the church is those who believe in Christ.

• As God the Spirit's people, the church is those who experience

fellowship.

Figure 1 . 3 : Summary of Implications of the Church as the People of God

The word koiniinia involves the idea of participating in or sharing

something in common with another. It can be used to describe a believer's

relationship with God ( 1 John 1 : 3 ) , but it is also used for the relation­

ship the Holy Spirit creates among believers. He makes them aware that

they share new life in Christ, which must radically alter how they relate

to one another. In the early church, koiniinia was initially expressed in

a virtual voluntary community of goods, where " [ a j l l the believers were

together and had everything in common'' (Acts 2:44). Fellowship was also

expressed in believers living what may be called the "one another" life.
42 CHAPTER 1

There are more than thirty specific commands regarding how believers are

to act toward one another, including forgiving one another, encouraging

one another, accepting one another, and, most of all, loving one another,

which appears seventeen times. We will have more to say about the impor­

tance of fellowship as an integral ministry of the church in chapter 10,

but fellowship as an intrinsic part of the nature of the church comes from

seeing the church as the people of God the Holy Spirit.

The Body of Christ

Perhaps the biblical image of the church that comes to mind most

readily is that of the body of Christ. But, in fact, this image occurs only in

the writings of Paul, and in only four of his letters (Romans, 1 Corinthians,

Ephesians, and Colossians). However, in those four letters, the body image

is used to illustrate in a vivid and memorable way a number of aspects of

the church. Interestingly, the use made of the body image in Romans and

1 Corinthians differs markedly from the use in Ephesians and Colossians,

so much so that they need to be examined separately.

In Romans and 1 Corinthians, the body of Christ is a metaphor for

the local church, and the emphasis is on the relationships the members of

the body have with one another. This is seen most clearly in 1 Corinthians

1 2 : 2 7 : "Now you are the body of Christ, and each one of you is a part of

if' The local church is not regarded here as merely a part of a larger body

of Christ, but as the body of Christ in that place. This is another support

for a proper understanding of the autonomy of the local church. No local

church should be isolated, but no local church needs a larger body to

complete it or enable it to function. It is the body of Christ, possessing full

ecclesial status.

There is no mention here of Christ as the head of the body. The eye

and ear are mentioned ( 1 Cor. 1 2 : 1 6 - 1 7 ) , but only as members in the body.

The body image in Romans and 1 Corinthians highlights three aspects of

the relationship members of the body enjoy with each other.

The first aspect is that of unity. Interestingly, Paul links the body's
45
unity to the two acts that we call ordinances or sacraments. In 1 Corin -

45. Most denominations use the word "sacrament" for baptism and the Lord's Supper, and there is

nothing objectionable about the word itself. The Latin word sacramentum originally was used

as a term for the oath of loyalty a soldier took to his commander. But since the term sacrament

over the years became associated with the view that grace is automatically conferred through

these acts and that they are essential to salvation, Baptists have generally preferred the term
THE NATURE OF THE CHURCH 43

thians 1 0 : 1 6 - 1 7 , Paul sees the Corinthians, participation or fellowship in

the Lord's Supper as creating and expressing the oneness they enjoy in

the body of Christ: "Because there is one loaf, we, who are many, are one

body, for we all share the one loaf" (v. 1 7 ) . In this meal, they celebrate

and express the common life they have in Christ. Gordon Fee comments

on this passage: "there can be little doubt that Paul intends to emphasize

the kind of bonding relationship of the worshipers with one another that

the meal expresses" and "the solidarity of the fellowship of believers is

created by their all sharing 'the one loaf":" The basis for their unity with

one another is their prior union with Christ, but the focus here is on their

unity with one another, and Paul naturally turns to the image of the body

to express that unity.

Likewise, in 1 Corinthians 1 2 : 1 3 , their unity in the body of Christ is

related to their common experience of baptism by the one Spirit: "we were

all baptized by one Spirit so as to form one body . . . and we were all given

the one Spirit to drink" There are several important points in this verse that

should be noted. First, contrary to the claims of some, Spirit baptism is an

experience common to all believers. The word all appears twice in this verse,

underscoring that fact. Second, the unity of the body is derived from the

unity of the Spirit. Because it is the one Spirit that is acting here, his creation

is one body. Third, his action is directed toward the creation of one body.

The preposition into (eis) can "either be local, indicating that into which all

were baptized, or denote the goal of the action, indicating the purpose or

goal of the baptismal action ( = 'so as to become one body')?" The meaning

of purpose or goal seems more likely here. Spirit baptism is invisible, and

places one in the universal body of Christ, but it is water baptism that is a

visible act with a local meaning, placing one in a local body of Christ. Some

may object that Ephesians 4:5 says there is one baptism, but the one baptism

may have two forms, just as the one church has both a local and a univer­

sal form. Spirit baptism identifies us with the universal church and water

baptism with a local church. In either case, the result is "one body"

ordinance to avoid these connotations. Some Baptists use the term sacrament but with a different

understanding of its meaning. See Stanley Fowler, More Than a Symbol: 1he British Baptist

Recovery of Baptismal Sacramentalism, Studies in Baptist History and Thought, vol. 2 (Milton

Keynes, Great Britain: Paternoster, 2002).

46. Gordon Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, The New International Commentary on the

New Testament, ed. F. F. Bruce (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987), 466.

47. Ibid., 603, n. 20.

44 CHAPTER 1

For Paul, the body image is everywhere associated with unity. It is based

on a common life in Christ, celebrated in the Lord's Supper. That unity is

created by the act of the Spirit, who baptizes believers into one body.

Paul also uses the body image to illustrate unity in diversity. Romans

12:4-5 and 1 Corinthians 12:14-20 echo the same message: many

members, but one body; diversity of gifts, but one body. The body makes

an obvious, clearly visible, and easily understandable illustration of Paul's

point, which perhaps accounts for the popularity of this image. Even so,

while easy to understand, the unity of the body is difficult to experience.

Paul reminds the Romans that it is only "in Christ" that "we though many,

form one body" (Rom. 1 2 : 5 ) . It took the supernatural power of a common

life in Christ and a common reception of the Spirit to overcome the natu­

ral divisions of the ancient world of Greek and Jew, slave and free, and

male and female. There can be diversity of race and sex and status, diver­

sity in function and gift, but one body, one Lord, one Spirit, one faith.

It is important, especially for Baptists, to remember both the areas in

which diversity is allowed or even esteemed and other areas where unity

is required. Baptists have a long history of divisions. I even have a friend

who says you're not a real Baptist until you've been through a church split;

and, sadly, there are few longtime Baptists who have not experienced such

a sad episode. However, most of those splits have come over issues that

should not have been allowed to threaten the unity of the body. In many

instances, diversity should have been embraced.

More recently, however, we have seen the rise of some in Baptist life

who have argued for an acceptance, not just of diversity in race, sex, or

status, but also diversity in faith, or doctrine. These Baptists have argued

that doctrine divides and ministry unites-that being Baptist means being

free from doctrinal constraints. But that is not how Baptists have histori­

cally approached the issue of unity, and it is not consistent with the biblical

mandate that the "one body" must have "one faith" (Eph. 4 : 4 - 5 ) .

Baptists have published dozens of confessions of faith to articulate the

"one faith" (Eph. 4:5) as they understood it. While they gladly affirm unity

in the universal body of Christ with all those who share life in Christ and

the presence of the Spirit, and while many Baptists individually express

unity with other believers in numerous community organizations or evan­

gelical parachurch ministries, they see that unity as limited to areas of

common doctrinal understanding. To walk together in church fellowship

requires a fuller unity and thus a fuller doctrinal agreement. Historically

THE NATURE OF THE CHURCH 45

most Baptist churches have included a statement of faith as part of their

founding documents, which articulates the common faith that is a legiti­

mate aspect of the church's unity. There must be diversity in many things,

but unity in doctrine, especially unity in the doctrine of the church, is

necessary for a local church to operate in genuine unity.

The third theme highlighted by the body of Christ image is mutu­

ality of love and care among the members of the body. Romans 1 2 : 5

says that in Christ's body, «each member belongs to all the others:' First

Corinthians 1 2 contains a long explanation of how each part of the body

needs every other part, and states that God desires all the members of

the body to «have equal concern for each other. If one part suffers, every

part suffers with it; if one part is honored, every part rejoices with it" (vv.

2 5 - 2 6 ) . This mutuality is reflected in the more than thirty «one another"

passages in the New Testament (such as «love one another;' «forgive one

another;' and many more). The care that members of the church offer to

each other is aptly portrayed in the image of the body, whose parts work

harmoniously together.

This biblical theme is also reflected in the language earlier Baptists

often used in confessions and church covenants to describe what it meant

to join together as a church. The widely influential Second London Confes­

sion of 1 6 7 7 says that church members «do willingly consent to walk

together according to the appointment of Christ, giving up themselves

to the Lord and one to another, by the will of God, in professed subjec­

tion to the ordinances of the Gospel?" Such language was found even

more often in church covenants. Whereas confessions of faith dealt mainly

with doctrine, church covenants emphasized the commitment church

49
members make to one another. The most widely used covenant was that

adopted by the 1 8 3 3 New Hampshire Baptist Convention. It described

the care members pledged to give to one another in these words: «we do,

therefore, in His strength engage, that we will exercise a mutual care as

members one of another to promote the growth of the whole body'"" The

convention saw such a pledge virtually as constitutive for the church. It is

48. William L. Lumpkin, Baptist Confessions of Faith, rev. ed. (Valley Forge, PA: Judson Press,

1969), 286. This confession was reissued in England for more than a hundred years and came to

America almost verbatim as the Philadelphia Confession, the most influential Baptist confession

in America well into the nineteenth century.

49. A collection of seventy-nine Baptist church covenants can be found in Charles W. Deweese,

Baptist Church Covenants (Nashville: Broadman, 1990), 1 1 5 - 9 9 .

50. Ibid., 157.

46 CHAPTER 1

derived from the image of the body, whose members care for one another

as part of their nature.

For any who question the propriety of using phrases like "church

members" or "church membership;' it is worth noting that the body image

gives us both the precedence for such language and the proper understand­

ing of it. Being a member of the church is nothing like being a member of

Sam's Club or a member of some team. Church members are those vitally

connected to the other members of the body as the physical members of

a body are vitally connected to that physical body. Any so-called "church

members" who can leave their churches without feeling the pain of being

severed were never members in the biblical sense at all. Biblical church

membership is a serious commitment.

To summarize, in Romans and 1 Corinthians, Paul uses the image

of the body of Christ to illustrate the relationships the members of a

local church have to one another. The predominant themes are unity

of the body, unity and diversity within the body, and the mutuality of

care among the members of the body. In Ephesians and Colossians, the

image of the body of Christ is used, but in a totally different context,

with different emphases.

First of all, in Ephesians and Colossians, the body is related to the

universal church. Five times Paul places the two together: "the church .

. . his body" (Eph. 1 : 2 2 - 2 3 ; 5 :2 3 , 29-30; Col. 1 : 1 8 , 24). In each case, the

description of the church points to and virtually requires the universal

sense. However, while the universal church does seem to fit the usage of

ekklesia in these two letters, the activities Paul describes ( of pastors and

teachers equipping God's people, of the body growing as each part does

its work; see Eph. 4 : 1 2 , 1 6 ; Col. 2 : 1 9 ) take place in local churches and thus

local assemblies are not totally out of view.

Second, in Ephesians and Colossians, a new element is added to the

usage of the body image, that of the relationship of the head to the body.

In these letters, a major emphasis is on the role and importance of Christ,

who is identified as the head of the body five times (Eph. 1 :22; 4: 1 5 ; 5 : 23 ;

Col. 1 : 1 8 ; 2 : 1 9 ) .

What themes emerge from Paul's usage of the body of Christ in these

two letters? The teaching on Christ as the head of the body highlights

the ideas of his authority over the body and his provision for the body.

His provision for the body leads to its growth, which is the third theme

encountered here. Each theme deserves more thorough consideration.

THE NATURE OF THE CHURCH 47

Despite recent attempts to remove the idea of authority from the Greek
51
word for head (kephale), the authority of the head over the body seems

to be one of the major emphases of Paul's teaching on Christ as the head

of the church. Paul's teaching on Christ as the head of the body is found

in some of the most exalted Christological passages in all the New Testa­

ment. In Ephesians 1:20-23, Christ is described as exalted above all rival

powers, for all time, with all things under his feet. This sovereign figure is

then appointed "head over everything for the church, which is his body, the

fullness of him who fills everything in every way" (vv. 22-23). It is hard to

imagine a more majestic description of sovereign authority, but Colossians

1 comes close. There Christ is the image of God, the firstborn, the Creator

of all, the one in whom all things consist (vv. 1 5 - 1 7 ) . This one is also the

head of the church, the one who is supreme or preeminent in everything

(v. 1 8 ) . He is even called "the head over every power and authority" (Col.

2 : 1 0 ) . But lest this authority seem authoritarian and harsh, it is described as

a loving, self-sacrificing authority in the beautiful comparison of Christ and

the church to a husband and wife (Eph. 5:23-33). Christ's headship certainly

involves authority, for the church is called to submit to Christ. But the head

exercises his authority on behalf of the church, loving her, giving himself up

for her, feeding her, and caring for her.

This theme of Christ as the authoritative head of the church has one

immediate practical implication for local churches, especially in the area

of church polity. One criterion for evaluating any form of church govern­

ment should be how well it preserves Christ's unique authority as head

of the church. We will return to this point when we consider the issue of

church polity and government.

The idea of authority is perhaps the central idea in Christ's headship

over the church, but it is not the only idea. Clinton Arnold notes that in the

ancient world, especially among first-century medical writers, the head

was seen as both the ruling part of the body and the source that provided
52
nourishment and sustenance. This idea of provision is also reflected in

51. See the article by Catherine Kroeger, "Head;' in Dictionary of Paul and His Letters, eds.

Gerald F. Hawthorne, Ralph P. Martin, and Daniel G. Reid (Downers Grove, IL/Leicester, UK:

InterVarsity, 1993), 375-77. Her work is subjected to a convincing critique by Wayne Grudem,

"The Meaning of kephale ("Head"): An Evaluation of New Evidence, Real and Alleged;' Journal

of the Evangelical Theological Society 44, no. 1 (March 2 0 0 1 ) : 25-65.

52. Clinton E. Arnold, "Jesus Christ: 'Head' of the Church (Colossians and Ephesians);' in Jesus

of Nazareth: Lord and Christ, eds. Joel B. Green and Max Turner (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans;

Carlisle, UK: Paternoster, 1994), 346-66. The same point is made by Gregory W Dawes, The
48 CHAPTER 1

Paul's usage. He uses virtually identical language in Ephesians 4 : 1 6 and

Colossians 2: 1 9 to describe Christ the head as the one "from whom" the

body derives what it needs to grow. Indeed, the problem with the Colos­

sians is that they have "lost connection with the head" (Col. 2 : 1 9 ) . This

is the same idea as that vividly pictured by Iesus's teaching in John 1 5 on

the vine and the branches. The branches receive all their sustenance from

connection with the vine; the body receives all its nourishment via the

head. The head makes provision for the body.

Those provisions are designed to aid the church in its growth. In Ephe­

sians, the growth envisioned seems to be not numerical, but spiritual. The

goal of growth is referred to as "unity in the faith and in the knowledge of

the Son of God;' or maturity, "attaining to the whole measure of the full­

ness of Christ;' or even growing into him "who is the head, that is, Christ"

(Eph. 4 : 1 3 - 1 6 ) . Knowing Christ their head and becoming like him is the

goal of the church's growth. But Paul is careful not to overlook or omit the

role of the leaders of the body. Part of Christ's provision for the body is

gifted leaders: "Christ himself gave the apostles, the prophets, the evange­

lists, the pastors and teachers" ( v. 1 1 ) . These gifted leaders then equip the

members of the body to carry out ministry. The end result is that the body

is "joined and held together by every supporting ligament" and grows "as

each part does its work" (v. 1 6 ) . The language in Colossians 2 : 1 9 is strik­

ingly similar: The body grows when it is "supported and held together

by its ligaments and sinews:' Paul is again drawing implications from

the diversity of parts in the human body for understanding the church.

In Romans and 1 Corinthians, the point was that the diversity of gifts in

the members and the multiplicity of members do not eliminate the unity

of the body. In Ephesians and Colossians, Paul carries the point further.

Unity is not only not eliminated by the multiplicity and diversity of the

body, but the diverse gifts of the body are necessary for both unity (hold­

ing the body together) and maturity (growing up to full Christlikeness).

One final caution should be added to our discussion of the church as

the body of Christ. There has been a temptation, especially in Catholic

thought, to think of the body of Christ as more than a mere metaphor for

the church. The Catholic Catechism sees the body language as justifying

the claim that "Christ and his Church thus together make up the 'whole

Body in Question: Meaning and Metaphor in the Interpretation of Ephesians 5:21-33 (Leiden:

Brill, 1998), 122-49.

THE NATURE OF THE CHURCH 49

53
Christ' ( Christus totus) :' Catholic theologian Richard McBrien speaks of

the "physical realism of the union between Christ and the Church" that

54
lies behind the body of Christ language used for the church. But this

seems to unjustifiably absolutize one image of the church and treat it as

more real or literal than the others, and leads to theological danger. As

Catholic bishop Avery Dulles says, seeing the church as in some real way

the actual body of Christ, such that in Christ, the incarnation of Christ on

earth is extended or prolonged, would seem to lead to "an unhealthy

divinization of the Church;' with the union of Christ and the church "a

biological and hypostatic one":" Would sin and error in the church then

be attributed to Christ, or would we have to assume the church could

never err? No, it is more justifiable exegetically and theologically to recog­

nize the body of Christ as an image for the church; an undeniably rich and

meaningful image, but nonetheless, just an image.

1. The image of the body points to the church's unity, seen especially in

the Lord's Supper and baptism.

2. The image of the body aptly illustrates how the church may be one,

while its members are diverse.

3. The body image reflects how the members of the church should show

a mutuality of love and care to one another.

4. Christ, as the head of the body, is the ultimate authority for the church.

5. As head, Christ also provides for the needs of the church.

6. Christlikeness is the goal of the church's growth; all the members of

the church contribute to the growth and unity of the church as all

perform their own particular ministries.

Figure 1 . 4 : Summary of Implications of the Church as the Body of Christ

The Temple of the Spirit

The third major image of the church in the New Testament is the

temple of the Holy Spirit. The first idea of the church as a building is

implied by Iesuss words in Matthew 1 6 : 1 8 (emphasis added): "you are

53. Catechism of the Catholic Church (New Hope, KY: Urbi et Orbi, 1994), 2 1 0 .

54. Richard McBrien, Catholicism, new ed. (New York: HarperSanFrancisco, 1994), 600.

55. Avery Dulles, Models of the Church, expanded ed. (New York: Doubleday, 1987), 55.
so CHAPTER 1

Peter, and on this rock I will build my church:' Historically, most discus­

sion of this verse has focused on the relationship between Peter (petros)

and the rock (petra) on which the church is built, chiefly because this verse

has been used by many Catholics to support the importance of the papacy

for the church. But that discussion, while important, should not distract

us from another important idea in the text, that of the church as a build­

ing. It is elaborated on elsewhere in the New Testament.

The main developer of this idea is Paul. In 1 Corinthians 3 : 9 , he begins

by comparing the church to both a field and a building, but it is the latter

idea that receives his attention. He states that the foundation of the build­

ing is Jesus Christ, with each Christian's work building on that founda­

tion, some in a way that will endure, and others in a way that will not (vv.

1 1 - 1 5 ) . But in verse 1 6 , Paul turns from the foundation upon which we

are building to envision the church as a building, and a very special build­

ing, God's temple. Elsewhere, Paul speaks of the individual Christian's

body as the temple of the Holy Spirit ( 1 Cor. 6 : 1 9 ) ; here he addresses the

church collectively as the temple of God.

Paul says, "You are God's temple:' But why is this temple especially

associated with God the Holy Spirit? A response is found in the last part

of 1 Corinthians 3 : 1 6 . The church is not the temple of God by anything

inherent in its members, but by virtue of the indwelling Holy Spirit. The

word used here for "temple:' which is also used for the church in 2 Corin -

thians 6 : 1 6 and Ephesians 2 : 2 1 , is naos, which "refers to the actual sanc­

tuary, the place of the deity's dwelling, in contrast to the word hieron,

which referred to the temple precincts as well as to the sanctuary'?" This

tells us that the key point being made when Paul refers to the church as

God's temple is that God indwells or inhabits the church. But the means

by which God indwells his people is the Holy Spirit. That is made explicit

in Ephesians 2 : 2 1 - 2 2 , where the church is called a holy temple, "a dwell­

ing in which God lives by his Spirit:' Thus, the temple of God is the

temple of the Spirit.

This leads to the first two implications we may draw about the nature

of the church from this image. The first is that just as the physical temple

was preeminently the place to worship God, because the temple was

56. Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 146. Fee notes that the distinction is not universal in first­

century Greek, but it is supported by the usage of the Septuagint, which seems to be the key

influence on Paul's usage.

THE NATURE OF THE CHURCH SI

recognized as his dwelling place, so the church, as the temple of the Spirit,

must be preeminently a worshiping people.

The Old Testament teaches that, in a sense, all that God created is

designed to bring praise and worship to him. Psalm 1 9 : 1 says that the

heavens themselves declare God's glory; Psalm 96 calls upon the heavens,

earth, sea, fields, and trees to be glad, sing, worship, and tremble before the

Lord ( vv. 9 - 1 2 ); the whole of Psalm 148 is devoted to enlisting the angels,

sun, moon, stars, animals, and even the elements of weather to give praise

to God; the last verse of the book of Psalms summarizes: "Let everything

that has breath praise the LORD" ( 1 5 0 : 6 ) . But in a special way God's people

are gathered together as his temple for the purpose of worship.

First Peter 2 : 5 compares believers to "living stones" that are built

together "into a spiritual house:' The word house was used in the Old

Testament and by Jesus as a synonym for the temple. When Jesus cleansed

the temple, he called it a "house of prayer" (see Isa. 56:7; Jer. 7 : 1 1 , quoted

by Jesus in Matt. 2 1 : 1 3 ) . The church, composed of believers, is not a physi­

cal temple like the one in Jerusalem but a spiritual one. However, it serves

a similar purpose, for the "living stones" that compose this temple are also

a "holy priesthood" who offer "spiritual sacrifices:' The adjective spiritual

indicates that the worship offered by these priests is a Spirit-empowered

worship, prompted by the Spirit who indwells them and forms them into

his temple. It also indicates that the sacrifices they offer are no longer the

animals prescribed by the Old Testament law but sacrifices that reflect

New Testament worship. Doing good and sharing with others materially

are referred to as sacrifices that please God (Phil. 4 : 1 8 ; Heb. 1 3 : 1 6 ) ; so is

using our lips to confess God's name (Heb. 1 3 : 1 5 ) . But Paul specifically

identifies offering our bodies, or our entire selves, as living sacrifices as

our "spiritual" or "rational" worship (Rom. 1 2 : 1 ) .

Another point to note in the development of this image is that those

offering the sacrifices in the temple of the Spirit are called "a holy priest­

hood;' "a royal priesthood;' and "a kingdom and priests" ( 1 Peter 2 : 5 , 9; Rev.

1 : 6 ; 5 : 1 0 ) . These verses form the basis for the doctrine of the priesthood of

57
all believers. The New Testament calls those who lead the church elders,

bishops, or pastors, but never priests. But by the end of the second century

another term for elder, presbyter, was contracted to priest and applied to

57. Uche Anizor and Hank Vess, Representing Christ: A Vision for the Priesthood of All Believers

(Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2 0 1 6 ) .

52 CHAPTER 1

clergy. Throughout the Middle Ages, the priesthood and priestly functions

were increasingly limited to clergy. Martin Luther is justly identified with

58
the recovery of the priesthood of all believers, but it has been especially

important in Baptist ecclesiology, where it has formed part of the basis

for congregational government. Since all believers are priests, and only

believers should be members of the church, Baptists have argued that all

these believer-priest church members are able and responsible to help the

church find God's direction for its life.

In more recent Baptist life, the doctrine of the priesthood of all believ­

ers has sometimes become the doctrine of the priesthood of the believer

(singular), and has been misinterpreted in terms of individual rights

and confused with the idea of soul competence. Soul competence, as

believed by Baptists, has been the conviction that each individual is able

and responsible before God for his or her relationship with God and does

not require the mediation of any human priest to come before God. This

applies to every human, and is related to our creation in God's image. The

priesthood of all believers applies only to believers and has to do with our

common responsibility to minister to one another and to the world. To

see it as somehow justifying an attitude of individual self-sufficiency is to

misunderstand the doctrine and to forget our need for the church and the

church's need for each member's ministry.

In terms of worship, the priesthood of all believers reminds us that

worship is never the province of preachers and musicians, with church

members as spectators. All believers are called upon to be those offering

the spiritual sacrifices of worship. Thus churches should actively seek ways

to involve all their members in worship, a challenge that grows as churches

get larger. As the temple of the Spirit, the church must be a worshiping

community. That is one of its essential, constitutive ministries.

Perhaps the most important and foundational implication of the church

as the temple of the Spirit is the idea of relationship. The purpose of the

tabernacle and later the temple in the Old Testament was to portray God's

dwelling among his people, not just to receive their worship but to bless

them and to show his desire for relationship with them. The tabernacle was

called the tent of meeting dozens of times, because God's glory filled the

58. Timothy George states, "Luther's greatest contribution to Protestant ecclesiology was his

doctrine of the priesthood of all believers:' Timothy George, The Theology of the Reformers

(Nashville: Broadman, 1988), 95.

THE NATURE OF THE CHURCH 53

tabernacle and there he met with his people. The temple of Solomon was

also regarded as a dwelling place of God, a place to which his people could

tum and find his presence (2 Chron. 7 : 1 5 - 1 6 ) . That purpose was furthered

in the coming of Iesus, who «tabernacled" or dwelt among us (John 1 : 1 4 )

for a time; but he eventually ascended. In one of the two passages in which

Jesus taught on the church, he promised his presence where two or three

gather in his name (Matt. 1 8 : 1 5 - 2 0 ) . Paul said that when the church gath­

ers, «the power of our Lord Jesus is present" ( 1 Cor. 5:4). Yet every time we

celebrate the Lord's Supper, we recognize Christ's absence, for we celebrate

the Supper only «until he comes" ( 1 Cor. 1 1 : 2 6 ) . How can we experience

the presence and power of Christ when he is ascended and we await his

coming? By means of the indwelling Holy Spirit, who is the Spirit of Christ

(Rom. 8:9), whose special function it is to make Christ's presence real now,

and who makes the church the temple where God meets with us in a special

way. It is only the Holy Spirit who can bring us into relationship with God,

for it is the Spirit who sanctifies us and makes us fit to enter relationship

with God ( 1 Cor. 6 : 1 1 ) . He makes us, not just a temple, but a holy temple

(Eph. 2 : 2 1 ) , a fit dwelling place for a holy God.

G. K. Beale has traced this temple imagery for the church through­

out the Scriptures and relates it to the mission of the church. His thesis

focuses on connecting the Old Testament temple symbolism to the escha­

59
tological reality of God's presence extended through the whole earth; the

church's mission is as an expanding temple, to extend the presence of God

throughout the world by winning people from all nations to Christ."

The image of the church as the temple of the Spirit, as taught in the

New Testament, also implies something of the relationship those in the

church have with each other. Ephesians 2 : 2 1 speaks of the way the church

«is joined together" (synarmologoumene). The root of this Greek word,

harmozo, is the word from which we get the English word harmonize. As

used here, the word speaks of the care with which a mason fits together
61
the stones in a building. The same word is used in Ephesians 4 : 1 6 to

59. Beale states his thesis explicitly: "My thesis is that the Old Testament tabernacle and temples

were symbolically designed to point to the cosmic eschatological reality that God's tabernacling

presence, formerly limited to the holy of holies, was to be expanded throughout the whole earth''

(G. K. Beale, The Temple and the Church's Mission: A Biblical Theology of the Dwelling Place

of God, New Studies in Biblical Theology 17 [Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity/Leicester, UK:

Apollos, 2004], 25).

60. Ibid., 262-63.

61. J. A. Motyer, "Body:' in Brown, ed., New International Dictionary ofNew Testament Theology, 1:241.
54 CHAPTER 1

describe how the parts of the body are carefully joined together. In the

same way that God arranges the parts of the body just as he wants them to

be ( 1 Cor. 1 2 : 1 8 ) , so God the builder carefully builds his temple, arrang­

ing the stones just as he desires them to be. We must remember that the

builder of the church is not a pastor or leader but God. Jesus said, "I will

build my church" (Matt. 1 6 : 1 8 ) . Both Paul and Peter use the passive voice

when speaking of the temple. It "is joined together" and is "being built"

(Eph. 2 : 2 1 ; 1 Peter 2 : 5 ) . The builder, though not specified, is clearly God.

But if this is so, if God is the one who carefully fits the stones together

and builds his people into a holy temple, why is there so often friction

between the stones, with some not wanting to be fit together with others?

Why do churches often seem like temples that are falling apart? One

danger, of course, is a faulty foundation. Any church not founded solidly

on Christ is at risk of falling apart ( 1 Cor. 3 : 1 0 - 1 1 ); it is only "in him" that

the stones are built together (Eph. 2 : 2 1 - 2 2 ) . It is only by coming to him

that we become fit building material ( 1 Peter 2:4).

There is another reason why many churches have a problem holding

their living stones together. We call the church the temple of the Spirit

because the Spirit is the mortar that holds the stones together. The church

is not to be held together by social bonds such as being of the same race or

class or income, but by the spiritual bond of a common possession of the

Holy Spirit. Church growth strategists tell us that churches grow fastest

when they target people most like those already in the church. They are

no doubt right; people are usually attracted to those with similar back­

grounds and lifestyles. But the New Testament is clear that the church

must not become a club of one type of people but a community that tran­

scends those things that divide people in society. In Paul's day, the call was

to transcend the barriers between Jew and Greek, slave and free, male and

female, and find unity in Christ (Gal. 3 : 2 8 ) . Today's barriers include race

(white, black, Hispanic), social class (rich, middle class, poor), and even

age (young families, senior adults). Fortunately, an increasing number of

churches are seeking to follow the model described by Paul and are seek­
62
ing to build multicultural churches. But contemporary churches need a

greater reliance on the Spirit and a deeper experience of his gift of fellow-

62. From a growing literature on this topic, two recent books are Malcolm Patten, Leading

a Multicultural Church (London; SPCK, 2016) and Douglas Brouwer, How to Become a

Multicultural Church (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2017).

THE NATURE OF THE CHURCH SS

ship if they are to be stones fitly joined together, especially when the stones

come from diverse backgrounds.

God fitly joins together the stones in his holy temple with the mortar

of fellowship. To switch metaphors, the Holy Spirit is the lubricant that

eases friction. Whether seen as mortar or lubricant, true fellowship is the

creation of the Holy Spirit and an essential ministry of the church. This

too must be a concern as churches grow larger, for fellowship can only

happen on a personal, small-group level. The need is for the multiplication

of small groups where believer-priests can minister to each other and

allow the Spirit to join them together by the bonds of loving fellowship.

Pastors know by experience that those who join a church but do not

develop such bonds tend to become easily disattached, because they were

never fitly joined together. That work is performed by the Holy Spirit, who

links people together on a personal level. He transforms a heap of stones

into a holy temple.

1. Because it is God's temple, the church must be a worshiping community.

2. In God's temple, all believers form the priesthood; all are involved in

the church's ministry.

3. The temple is also the place of relationship.

• The Spirit mediates our relationship with God, communicating his

presence and power and sanctifying us.

• The Spirit joins together believers as the stones in God's temple

through his creation of fellowship.

Figure 1 . 5 : Summary of Implications of the Church as the Temple of the Spirit

While this chapter in no way exhausts biblical teaching on the nature

of the church, the major outlines are in place. The following chapter will

show how the church in history has filled in that outline, by formulating

in two major ways distinguishing marks of the church.

 C H A P T E R 2

T H E MA R K S O F T H E C H U R C H

Historical Perspective

WE TURN NOW FROM AN examination of biblical teaching on the nature

of the church to a consideration of historical formulations of the marks of

the church. We look at two major ways those marks have been formulated

in the past. History is certainly not infallible; only Scripture is. But our

interpretation of Scripture is not infallible, and those who looked at Scrip­

ture in other times may see aspects we have missed. Thus, we consider

their views-open to learning from them, but free to critique them as well.

THE PATRISTIC FORMULATION: "WE BELIEVE IN ONE,

HOLY, CATHOLIC,AND APOSTOLIC CHURCH"

The single most influential statement concerning the church from

1
history comes in the line from the Nicene Creed giving the four classical

notae of the church: unity or oneness, holiness, catholicity, and apostolicity.

1. This line is taken from what is usually referred to as the Nicene Creed, though this line was

not in the creed developed at Nicaea in 325, but from an addition to the creed attributed to

the Council of Constantinople in 3 8 1 . Some, therefore, want to call this form of the creed the

NicenoConstantinopolitan Creed, but the shorter title has prevailed in popular usage.

57
58 CHAPTER2

These four marks are the starting point for many discussions of the church,
2
and are widely accepted by both Protestants and Catholics. We note that

this confessional formula emerged in the context of the church's struggle to

3
define itself against a variety of challengers. This origin raises some ques­

tions. Are these four marks as prominent in Scripture as they are in the

creed? In other words, did the historical circumstances lead the early church

to emphasize the importance of these four adjectives (one, holy, catholic,

apostolic) beyond their importance in Scripture? Do these marks relate

more to the intrinsic nature of the church, or do they just reflect impor­

tant but secondary aspects of the church? And to what sense of the church

do they refer? We noted that the word ekklesia refers in Scripture to both

local assemblies of believers and the universal body of believers. Are local

churches one, holy, catholic, and apostolic, or just the universal church?

Finally, how sufficient or comprehensive are these marks in identifying a

true and valid church? Are there other marks that need to be added?

The Oneness of the Church

The creedal description of the church originated in the context of

controversy and threats to the church's unity. The Nicene Council was

called by the emperor Constantine to deal with the threat to the unity

of his empire caused by the split in the church over the Arian claim that

Christ was an exalted creature, but not fully God. But the concern for

oneness goes back far earlier. Controversies troubled the church from its

inception, and unity was an ongoing concern.

In the middle of the third century, Cyprian of Carthage wrote an

important work, On the Unity of the Church, in which he viewed unity

in terms of communion with the bishop. Thus unity was a visible matter,

easily verified by one's connection to the church headed by the bishop.

2. See, for example, the recent affirmation by three evangelicals, including one Baptist, in Richard

D. Phillips, Philip G. Ryken, and Mark E. Dever, The Church: One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic

(Phillipsburg, NJ: P & R Publishing, 2004); and the utilization of the four marks in Craig

Van Gelder, The Essence of the Church: A Community Created by the Spirit (Grand Rapids:

Baker, 2000), 114-26. Interestingly, Catholic Richard McBrien only notes the four marks in

connection with pre- Vatican II Catholic ecclesiology, suggesting a deemphasis of the marks in

contemporary Catholic ecclesiology. See Richard McBrien, Catholicism, new ed. (New York:

HarperSanFrancisco, 1994), 659.

3. Glenn Hinson says, "This formula took shape chiefly in efforts of the churches to define

themselves in relation to the Montanist, Novatianist, and Donatist schisms:' E. Glenn Hinson,

introduction to Understandings of the Church, trans. and ed. E. Glenn Hinson (Philadelphia:

Fortress Press, 1986), 4.

THEMARKSOFTHECHURCH 59

Initially, loyalty to any one of a number of recognized bishops in the major

cities was sufficient, but over a long period of time, the bishop of Rome

assumed a more and more central role. He became the symbol and source

of the church's unity. To be in communion with him was necessary to be

part of the one church. Indeed, in 1 3 0 2 , Pope Boniface VIII claimed that

submission to the Roman pontiff was necessary for salvation.

In 1054, the unity of the visible church was called into question by the

schism between Christians in the East, who recognized the primacy of the

patriarch of Constantinople, and Christians in the West, who continued to

see the bishop of Rome as the rock on which the church is founded. Thus

the church was divided into Orthodox and Roman Catholic.

While the schism called unity into question, the Reformation made

some reformulation of the mark of unity a necessity. The Protestant

Reformers continued to affirm their faith in the one, holy, catholic, and

apostolic church, but they gave the four marks an interpretation quite
4
different than that of the Catholic Church. They were not in fellowship

with the bishop of Rome, but they claimed a spiritual unity with all those

who were part of the invisible church, composed of all those truly saved.

Baptists have agreed with the Reformers that the unity of the church

is spiritual, not organizational or institutional. It is modeled after the unity

of the Father and Son, which is not an institutional or organizational unity,

but a spiritual unity, based on a common nature (John 1 7 : 2 0 - 2 1 ) . This is

why Ephesians 4:4 can say categorically, "There is one body" All those who

belong to Christ share in a oneness rooted in a common relationship with

him. But how is this oneness, while undeniably true of the church univer­

sal, in any sense a mark oflocal churches?

Jonathan Leeman has given a twofold answer to that question: "apostolic

doctrine unites all Christians and all churches, but a local church is united by

both apostolic doctrine and apostolic office:' He sees apostolic office as some­

thing exercised by all the members of a local church in affirming each other

as holy through the ordinances. He thus relates the unity of the church to

both apostolicity and holiness, reflected in a local church's authority to affirm

4. Paul Avis, The Church in the Theology of the Reformers (Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock, 2002),

says, "if the Reformers were asked what they made of the credal marks of the Church-unity,

holiness, catholicity, apostolicity-they would answer with the whole Christian tradition that

these are the essential notes of the Church:' But, Avis goes on to say that they saw these marks

as more dealing with the "eschatological dimensions of the Church" and were more interested in

the marks that answered their pressing present question of where the true Church may be found,

the marks of"word and sacrament;' as "embodiments of the gospel" (8).

60 CHAPTER2

believers as holy through baptizing them and allowing them to partake of the

5
Lord's Supper. Leeman provides a helpful discussion of all four marks in a

6
local church (or "congregational") context, and certainly local church unity

is more than just doctrinal. Mark Driscoll suggests five important aspects

of local church unity: theological, relational, philosophical, missional, and

organizational," with relational unity seeming to be highlighted in descrip­

8
tions of the early church. However, as a mark of the universal church, theo­

logical unity would seem to deserve special emphasis.

Local churches partake of the oneness of the universal church to the

degree that they hold to the one Lord and one faith of that one church. In

other words, churches that profess and hold to the gospel are one with the

9
church universal and can rightly claim the mark of unity. Such unity should

find expression in how the local church interacts with other local churches

who also profess the faith of the gospel and are thus one with them. One

simple way a local church can express its unity with other gospel-believing

churches is simply by praying for God's blessing on another local church

10
in its community, even by name. Other avenues for expressing this unity

include churches coming together across denominational lines to support

parachurch ministries that are faithful to the gospel, whether they specialize

in ministry to youth (groups such as Fellowship of Christian Athletes and

Campus Life), ministry to those in prison (Prison Fellowship), or ministry to

those with special needs (food pantries, clothes closets, pregnancy support

centers). In fact, as such parachurch groups have exploded in the past fifty

years, Christians have met each other in these groups across denominational

lines and have discovered that they do share oneness in the gospel. Craig Van

5. Jonathan Leeman, "A Congregational Approach to Unity, Holiness, and Apostolicity" in Baptist

Foundations: Church Government for an Anti-Institutional Age, eds. Mark Dever and Jonathan

Leeman (Nashville: B & H Academic, 2 0 1 5 ) , 335.

6. See Jonathan Leeman, "A Congregational Approach to Catholicity: Independence and

Interdependence;' in ibid., 367-80.

7. Mark Driscoll and Gerry Breshears, Vintage Church: Timeless Truths and Timely Methods

(Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2008), 137-40.

8. See Acts 2:44-47; 4:32 and Philippians 2 : 1 - 2 . For the importance of this aspect of unity in

relationship to multisite churches, see John S. Hammett, "What Makes a Multi-Site Church

One Church?" in Marking the Church: Essays in Ecclesiology, eds. Greg Peters and Matt Jenson

(Eugene, OR: Pickwick, 2016), 3-16.

9. Richard Phillips develops this idea of the gospel as the boundary of Christian unity. See Richard

D. Phillips, "One Church;' in Phillips, Ryken, and Dever, The Church, 28-33.

10. At a visit to Capitol Hill Baptist Church in Washington, DC, I was struck by their practice of

praying for another local church by name in their morning worship service. Too often local

churches see each other as competitors, not as united in the gospel.

THEMARKSOFTHECHURCH 61

Gelder sees such expressions of unity as crucial for the nature of the church.

While he agrees that unity does not require institutional oneness, he believes

the oneness that is given to the church by God must be expressed "within the

historical church" and in concrete forms of communion. To do less, he adds,

"is to betray both the nature of God and the nature of the church?"

Unity can also be given expression, at least in a limited way, in denom­

inations. Some see denominations as sinful expressions of the division

of the church, and no doubt denominations can be guilty of a divisive

spirit. But denominations can also exist in a spirit of humility and serve

to give some visible expression of unity on a larger than local church

level. Baptists have affirmed the propriety of coming together in associa­

tions, with one reason for doing so being the desire to show something

of a visible unity. In the London Confession of 1644, congregations are

referred to "as members of one body in the common faith under Christ

their only head?" Here it is not the church that is one body, but churches

are the members of this one body. They come together to highlight a form

of the body larger than a local church, thus giving visible expression to

their belief in the unity of the body of Christ on an extra-local church

level. Richard Phillips argues that denominations do not detract from the

unity of the church, but serve it. Denominations allow us to have a limited

organizational unity, and promote spiritual unity among denominations,

"since we are not forced to argue our way to perfect agreement but can

accept our differences of opinion on secondary matters':"

How should we evaluate this mark of oneness? How important is it in

biblical perspective? Certainly the unity of the church is a biblical theme.

The metaphors of the people of God, the body of Christ, the temple of the

Spirit, all point to the unity of the church. As there is unity in the Godhead,

so there is unity in his church. Van Gelder says, "The essential oneness of
14
the church . . . finds its source in the oneness of the Triune God:' As Paul

said to the troubled church in Corinth, "Is Christ divided?" ( 1 Cor. 1 : 1 3 ) .

The image of the body is especially utilized to insist on the unity of the

church, despite the diversity of members.

Moreover, unity is affirmed as a present reality, not just a pious hope.

By God's own nature and by his design, the assembly gathered around

11. Van Gelder, Essence of the Church, 122.

12. Lumpkin, Baptist Confessions of Faith, 169.

13. Phillips, "One Church;' 27.

14. Van Gelder, Essence of the Church, 122.

62 CHAPTER2

Christ, composed of all his people, is one. Ephesians 4:4 says, "There is one

body" It is a fact, not a hope. On the local level, any local church embrac­

ing the gospel is one with the church universal; it is one with all other

believers on the only level that will endure eternally. In terms of expressing

that unity in concrete ways here and now, churches will vary in how fully

they express that unity, and there is room for much improvement along

those lines. Unity is God's gift to every church in the gospel; expressing it

is every church's ongoing task.

Yet in the end, unity is not an end in itself, nor is it the most important

element of the nature of the church, nor is it the definitive mark of the

church. It is based on the gospel and should serve the gospel. Thus any call

to unity that involves a sacrifice of the gospel is not a call to biblical unity.

Moreover, even on the secondary issues that historically have divided

denominations, unity does not require a sacrifice of conscience in issues

where we honestly differ. Unity does not require uniformity. Though the

focus of this book is a presentation of ecclesiology from a Baptist perspec­

tive, this author recognizes and rejoices in the unity Baptists share with all

who embrace the gospel and form the one body of Christ.

The Holiness of the Church

Holiness, as perhaps the central attribute of God, was a major concern

of the early church. Christians were commanded to be holy, as God is holy.

As God's called-out people, they were called to holiness. As the church,

they were indwelt by the Holy Spirit. But there was not agreement on how

holiness was to be related to the nature of the church.

There were two groups, the Novatians in the third century and the

Donatists in the fourth century, who separated from the church over this

issue of holiness. They objected to what they saw as the too-easy reac­

ceptance into the church of those who had lapsed under persecution,

believing the presence of such individuals tainted the church's holiness.

Augustine opposed the Donatists, seeing their schismatic spirit as a far

greater sin against the church's unity than the sin of the lapsed against the

church's holiness. In fact, Augustine argued that the true holiness of the

church was the holiness of its head, Jesus Christ. Those in union with him

and indwelt by his sanctifying Spirit share in his holiness, but that holiness

may not be seen in the lives of the members of the visible church today.

The church will one day be perfected in holiness, but in the world today,

the church is a corpus permixtum, a body composed of both those who

THEMARKSOFTHECHURCH 63

would be saved and those who would be lost. According to Augustine,

one could not know with perfect assurance who would be saved and who

would be lost. Therefore, one had to do as the parable of the wheat and

tares suggests: Allow the wheat and tares to grow together until the time

of the harvest when God will separate the two (see Matt. 1 3 : 2 4 - 3 0 ) . Th u s ,

in the present, holiness pertains to the invisible church essentially and to

15
the visible church only partially.

The Reformers disagreed with Augustine on the issue of personal

assurance of salvation, but generally followed him in accepting the

church as a corpus permixtum, a mixed body whose holiness lies not in

the personal lives of its members but in its head. Anabaptists and early

Baptists differed markedly from the magisterial Reformers on this issue.

They pointed out that the parable in Matthew 1 3 identifies the field in

which the wheat and tares grow together as the world, not the church.

They sought to be a pure church of visible saints, practicing church disci­

pline and limiting church membership to those who could make a claim

to genuine salvation, manifested by a life matching their profession. But

even in the most well-disciplined and godly congregation, perfection in

holiness is not achieved in this life. Should holiness be deleted from the

identifying marks of the church?

Perhaps a resolution of this question can come from a recognition of

the twofold meaning of the word holy in the New Testament. Holy can

mean both a special status, of being set apart, and conduct that is morally

pure. In the first sense, all believers are holy, because in salvation they
16
are set apart to God for his purposes. Thus Paul refers to the church in

Corinth, though riddled with sin in their personal conduct, as those "sanc­

tified [or holy] in Christ Jesus" ( 1 Cor. 1 : 2 ) . Forty times Paul calls Chris­

tians "saints" or "holy ones:' Holiness is their status, from the moment of

justification onward. Holiness, in terms of their moral conduct, is their

calling. Paul calls the church in Corinth both "sanctified in Christ Jesus"

and "called to be his holy people" ( v. 2 ) .

May we say, then, that every church, as part of its nature, is holy

in status and called to be holy in conduct? We could, if churches were

15. For a fuller discussion, see G. G. Willis, Saint Augustine and the Donatist Controversy (London:

SPCK, 1950), 1 1 7 - 1 8 .

16. Philip G. Ryken writes, "The holiness of the church is a gospel holiness. It is based on the saving

work of Jesus Christ:' See Philip G. Ryken, "A Holy Church;' in Phillips, Ryken, and Dever, The

Church, 6 1 .
64 CHAPTER2

composed of all Christians. That seems to have been the case with the New

Testament churches. Six of Paul's letters are specifically addressed "to all

the saints:' as if he assumes that only they are members of the church. This

is one of the reasons why Baptists historically placed regenerate church

membership at the center of their ecclesiology, and practiced careful

church discipline; they sought to be holy churches. But most non-Baptist

churches baptize and accept into membership infants, acknowledging that

they are not regenerate; and few if any Baptist churches, despite their insis­

tence on regeneration prior to baptism and church membership, would

claim that they have never mistakenly baptized some who were not truly

regenerate. So many if not all visible local churches contain some within

their membership who are not saved, and thus not holy, in either status or

conduct, and yet few would say that such bodies are not churches.

Craig Van Gelder thinks the holiness of the church is dependent on

neither the nature of the church's members nor their behavior. He says, "The

redemptive reign of God, present through the indwelling of the Spirit, makes

the church holy by nature'?" But the Spirit does not indwell unbelievers, and

thus the holiness of a church is related to the nature of its members. This

means that holiness is a partial or provisional mark of a local church. It is

holy to the degree that it is composed of those who have been made holy in

status by union with Christ (justification) and are being made holy in their

conduct by the indwelling Spirit (sanctification). Its holiness is obscured to

the degree that unbelievers are present in it, and to the degree that unbeliev­

ing conduct is practiced, even by those who are holy in status.

Holiness is a reality now for the universal church, described in Hebrews

1 2 : 2 3 as "the church of the firstborn . . . the spirits of the righteous made

perfect;' but it remains the goal of the church on earth. It is also that for

which Christ died, as he "loved the church and gave himself up for her to

make her holy . . . and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without

stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy" (Eph. 5:25-27).

The Catholicity of the Church

Most Baptists instinctively react against the word catholic, but we need

to distinguish between catholic (with a lowercase c), which is a fine adjec­

tive simply meaning general, worldwide, or universal, and Catholic ( with

an uppercase C) which is part of the title of the Roman Catholic Church,

17. Van Gelder, Essence of the Church, 1 1 7 .

THEMARKSOFTHECHURCH 65

indicating that the church that acknowledges the primacy of the bishop of

Rome seeks to be a worldwide, comprehensive church. Mark Dever says

18
the best modern equivalent to the word catholic is simply universal.

Early on, Christians believed that they all shared the same faith and

mission and the "catholic church" meant the "real or authentic church;'

19
and was thus associated with orthodoxy. As the church spread, catholic

came to mean extending to all areas and types of people. This meaning of

catholic is illustrated by the words of Cyril of Jerusalem in his catechetical

lectures given c. A.D. 350: "The Church, then, is called Catholic because it

is spread through the whole world, from one end of the earth to the other";

he adds, "It is called Catholic because it brings into religious obedience

every sort of men, rulers and ruled, learned and simple, and because it is a

universal treatment and cure for every kind of sin.?"

The lack of catholicity was one of the arguments made by the Roman

Catholic Church against the Reformers. The Reformation resulted in the

development of new churches, but only in a limited geographical sphere.

The Reformers responded by claiming a catholicity, not of geography, but

of time. They saw themselves in continuity with the church throughout

most of its history; the Roman Church of their day had departed from

the path of historic orthodoxy and thus forfeited the claim to catholicity.

More important, they developed another set of marks for a true church.

They never denied the four classical notae, but because both they and their

Catholic opponents could claim them, and because the Reformers saw the

four traditional marks as applying mainly to the invisible church, they

saw the need for other marks to give guidance to those looking for a true

church. We will discuss those marks shortly.

Is there a biblical basis for the mark of catholicity as an aspect of the

nature of the church? While the word catholic does not appear in the New

Testament, there are a number of aspects of the church that are at least

consistent with catholicity. The fact that the church consists of those called

out by God means the church can impose no limitation of age, sex, or

race on its members. In Christ's church, there is "neither Jew nor Greek,

slave nor free . . . male and female" (Gal. 3 : 2 8 ) . Any church that erects any

18. Mark E. Dever, "A Catholic Church;' in Phillips, Ryken, and Dever, The Church, 70.

19. Ibid., 7 1 .

20. Cyril of Jerusalem, "The Catechetical Lectures;' in Cyril of Jerusalem and Nemesius ofEmesa, ed.

and trans. William Telfer, The Library of Christian Classics (Philadelphia: Westminster Press,

1960), 4 : 1 8 6 .
66 CHAPTER2

limitation other than that erected by God himself, which is faith "in Christ

Iesus" (v. 26), violates catholicity.

The metaphor of the people of God shows the catholicity of the

church over time, as it is connected to God's ongoing project of gather­

ing for himself a people. Furthermore, the fact that Christ has "purchased

for God persons from every tribe and language and people and nation,

(Rev. 5:9) and commanded us to "make disciples of all nations'' (Matt.

2 8 : 1 9 ) shows his intention that his church be worldwide. Sadly, however,

the church has been slow to hear and heed Christ's command. Today, two

thousand years later, there are still hundreds of people groups with no

disciples. The church is not yet fully catholic geographically. Mark Dever,

however, argues that the church's catholicity can be seen in the universal­

ity of the gospel as the one way of salvation for all kinds of people: "The

church's catholicity is rooted in and bounded by the gospel's catholicity.

Anytime, anywhere, anyone can be forgiven his or her sins by faith alone

in the one and only Savior, our Lord Jesus Christ. That is the true catholic

doctrine of the true catholic church?"

Therefore, we may say that while the church does not yet have full

catholicity in the sense of existing empirically among every people, it is

catholic in offering a universally applicable saving message and possessing

a universal missionary mandate. Moreover, the catholicity of the church is

an important safeguard against the danger of the church becoming identi­

22
fied with one culture or one race or one type of people.

The Apostolicity of the Church

The apostles came to the fore in discussions in the early church in

connection with the question of authority. The apostles were seen as those

authorized by Christ to lead the church. From the beginning, the church

was under apostolic teaching (Acts 2 : 4 2 ) . But as the apostles died, the

question of authority resurfaced, especially as heretics such as the Gnos­

tics arose. Orthodoxy became identified with teaching that was faithful

to apostolic teaching. But where could apostolic teaching be found? The

21. Dever, ''A Catholic Church;' 92.

22. Ibid., 88-92, identifies four problems the catholicity of the church addresses: provincialism,

sectarianism, racism, and the distinction between the limited focus of a parachurch and the

catholic nature of the church. Along similar lines, Van Gelder, Essence of the Church, 119-20,

sees the catholicity of the church as affirming that the gospel is translatable into every culture,

but normative over all cultures and a prisoner to none.

THEMARKSOFTHECHURCH 67

apostles and some of their associates had left writings that the church

accepted as Scripture, but the canon of the New Testament was still taking

shape. Furthermore, the Gnostics cited Scripture in support of their argu­

ments, and even claimed to possess a secret apostolic testimony. Irenaeus, a

second-century church father, responded that the true apostolic testimony

had been passed down in the churches established by the apostles. The

apostles left not only writings, but also an oral tradition that provided the

key to the right interpretation of Scripture. This oral tradition was espe­

cially entrusted to the bishop, who then passed it down to the succeeding
23
bishop, and so on.

In this context, apostolicity came to be understood in terms of apostolic

succession. The church is apostolic in its doctrine because its teachers, the

bishops, are the authorized successors of the apostles and share their func­

tion of giving the church authoritative teaching. Initially, apostolic succes­

sion was claimed for the bishops in several cities, but increasingly focus was

placed on the bishop of Rome, who was seen as the successor of Peter, who

was appointed by Christ to be the rock on which the church is founded.

The problem with this understanding of apostolicity is that there is no

indication that the apostles appointed successors, or that if they had succes­

sors, that those successors would have the same function. The Reformers

saw the office of apostle as unique and nonrepeatable; thus the mark of

apostolicity was understood as faithfulness to the apostolic gospel and the

apostolic teaching, preserved for us in the New Testament, which itself

authorizes the Old Testament as equally authoritative, God-given teach­

24
ing. This understanding of apostolicity is confirmed by the qualifications

for an apostle in Acts 1 : 2 1 - 2 2 (which make the office nontransferable), by

statements such as Ephesians 2:20 ( the church is built "on the foundations

of the apostles and prophets"), and by the concern of the early church to

remain true to what was originally taught, seen in passages like Jude 1 :3

("contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints").

To be apostolic in this sense does seem to be closely related to the

church's nature. How can the church be God's people, Christ's body, the

Spirit's temple, without divine guidance? Christ, as head of the church, is

23. Irenaeus, "Against Heresies;' 3.2-5, in The Ante-Nicene Fathers, 1 : 4 1 5 - 1 7 .

24. Philip Ryken reflects this perspective. He says, "An apostolic church, therefore, is one that

preaches the gospel the apostles preached" and "An apostolic church is Bible-based in its

teaching-both testaments:' See Ryken, 'J\n Apostolic Church;' in Phillips, Ryken, and Dever,

The Church, 1 0 1 , 104.

68 CHAPTER2

responsible to direct his body, the church. He called and appointed twelve

apostles to be his agents in teaching and directing the churches. We see

that direction and guidance in their actions in the New Testament, but we

also see them claiming authority for their writings to give guidance and

direction to all the churches (Col. 4 : 1 6 ; 2 Thess. 3 : 1 4 ) . Thus, for a church

to be apostolic it must seek above all to be governed by Scripture.

That is what Baptists claim. They seek to be people of the Book, New

Testament Christians. However, no church perfectly understands and

appropriates the apostles' teaching. Some churches, especially today,

challenge or even repudiate apostolic teaching. Thus, local churches are

more or less apostolic, depending on their doctrine of Scripture, and their

interpretation and application of it. By contrast, the universal church, or

at least that portion of the universal church gathered in heaven, possesses

full apostolicity. Those in heaven obey the apostolic teaching and under­

stand it as fully as humans can. If they have an interpretive question, the

apostolic authors are present to answer. For those on earth, full apostolic­

ity remains the quest, at least among those who see the apostolic teaching

as coming with the authority of Christ himself, given to us in the New

Testament, and illumined for us by the Spirit as we seek to understand its

meaning and practice its precepts.

Evaluation of the Traditional Marks

The four classical marks have been one of the most common

approaches taken by theologians to describe the most important attri­

butes of the church, utilized by writers as diverse as Hans Kung, G. C.

25
Berkouwer, and Mark Dever. In fact, Jonathan Wilson thinks submis­

sion to these four marks is crucial for the development of an evangelical

26
ecclesiology that is both faithful and improvisational.

However, in spite of their widespread acceptance, the four classi­

cal marks, while helpful, do not seem to be comprehensive or definitive in

outlining what the church is, for a number of reasons. First, the words them­

selves are ambiguous. That is why both Protestants and Catholics have been

25. See Hans Kung, The Church (Garden City, NY: Image Books, 1976) and G. C. Berkouwer,

The Church, trans. James E. Davison (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1976). For Dever, see his

contribution to The Church: One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic, and "The Church;' in A Theology

for the Church, ed. Daniel Akin, rev. ed. (Nashville: B & H, 2014), 6 1 0 - 1 2 .

26. Jonathan Wilson, "Practicing Church: Evangelical Ecclesiologies at the End of Modernity;' in

The Community of the Word: Toward an Evangelical Ecclesiology, eds. Mark Husbands and Daniel

J. Treier (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity/Leicester, UK: Apollos, 2005), 63-72).

THEMARKSOFTHECHURCH 69

able to affirm them; they fill these terms with quite different meanings. Yet

even when viewed in ways that seem to mesh to some degree with biblical

teaching, these four marks do not seem to highlight all of the aspects of the

church that are most central in biblical teaching. Howard Snyder echoes these

criticisms and advocates adding "many, charismatic, local and prophetic" as

supplements to "one, holy, catholic ( or universal), and apostolic'?"

Furthermore, the marks all seem to be related at least as much to the

gospel as to the church. The gospel sets the boundary of the church's unity;

it gives the church its holiness as part of the gift of salvation; its universal

nature gives the church its catholicity; and the gospel is the heart of the

28
apostolic teaching that the church is to preserve. Thus, perhaps it is more

accurate to see the gospel as marking the church more than unity, holi­

29
ness, catholicity, and apostolicity.

In addition, the classical marks seem less clearly applicable to the local

church than to the universal one, but the local church is emphasized more

in Scripture and is how believers experience the church today. Even in terms

of the universal church, the church is not yet fully catholic. These four marks

are possessed partially by local churches today, and are helpful guides and

goals for areas of future improvement, but such bodies are still churches,

even though not yet perfected in unity, holiness, catholicity, or apostolicity'?"

THE REFORMATION FORMULATION:

THE WORD AND THE SACRAMENTS

The Reformation precipitated the division of the church into various

groups and thus was faced with the need to provide an answer for those who

anxiously questioned, "How may I find a true church?" This was more than

an academic exercise; it was a matter of the utmost practical importance.

Many assumed that outside the church there was no salvation. Thus, there

could be no appeal to marks that only identified some invisible or universal

church. These people needed to know if the church in their neighborhood

was a true church in which they might find salvation.

27. Howard Snyder, "The Marks of Evangelical Ecclesiology;' in Evangelical Ecclesiology: Reality or

Illusion? ed. John G. Stackhouse Jr. (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2003), 8 1 - 8 8 .

28. This seems to be the underlying theme throughout Phillips, Ryken, and Dever, The Church.

29. As Millard Erickson says, the gospel is "the one factor that gives basic shape to everything the

church does, the element that lies at the heart of all its functions:' Millard Erickson, Christian

Theology, 3rd ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2 0 1 3 ) , 980.

30. For further reflection on all four marks, see Greg Peters and Matt Jenson, eds., Marking the

Church: Essays in Ecclesiology.

70 CHAPTER2

On this question, the magisterial Reformers (Luther, Zwingli, and

Calvin) gave much the same answer. Calvin's response is often quoted:

"Wherever we see the Word of God purely preached and heard, and the

sacraments administered according to Christ's institution, there, it is not

to be doubted, a church of God exists":" At times, Calvin adds a third

mark, that of church discipline, and Luther in one place lists seven marks

of a true church, but Luther also says that all the marks boil down to the

one mark of the Word: "even if there were no other sign than this alone, it

would still suffice to prove that a Christian, holy people must exist there,

for God's word cannot be without God's people, and conversely, God's

people cannot be without God's word.":"

These signs relate directly to the struggle the Reformers had with

the Catholic Church. The identifying slogans of the Reformation (sola

Scriptura, sola gratia, sola fide) are all encompassed in their marks.

The pure Word, Scripture alone, must be preached. For the Reformers,

the preaching of the Word was almost synonymous with the preach­

ing of the gospel. The gospel message of the Word was salvation by

grace alone, not grace plus one's best efforts. And that saving grace was

received by faith alone, not via the sacraments as understood by the

Catholic Church.

The first mark, the pure preaching of the Word, is close to the idea of

apostolicity, as discussed above. The church is apostolic when it listens to

the apostolic teaching, found in the written Word of God. That mark is

true of the church in heaven, but on earth we are still struggling to under­

stand and rightly preach God's pure Word. Here the narrower meaning of

the Word as the gospel is important. Calvin was willing to call a group a

true church, even if they did not understand all of God's Word aright, as

long as they preserved and preached the pure gospel message.

Here we encounter a true sine qua non of the church. If it loses the

gospel message, a group of people is no longer a true church. It may be

a religious society or a club, but it is not a church, for God's called-out

people are called out by the gospel and come in response to the gospel.

The power of the gospel is what reconciles them to God, unites them to

31. John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 2 1 : 1 0 2 3 ( 4 . 1 . 9 ) .

32. Martin Luther, "On the Councils and the Church;' in Martin Luther's Basic Theological Writings,

ed. Timothy Lull (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1989), 547. The complete list of seven signs is the

Word, baptism, the Lord's Supper, church discipline, called and consecrated ministers, public

praise and thanksgiving, and the sacred cross of suffering.

THEMARKSOFTHECHURCH 71

Christ, and allows them to be indwelt by the Spirit. There can be no people

of God, body of Christ, or temple of the Spirit without the gospel.

The second mark, the proper administration of the sacraments, is

more problematic. Can a true church exist if the sacraments are not rightly

observed? The Reformers saw the Catholic observance of the Mass, involv­

ing the claims that Christ was recrucified, that it was necessary for salvation,

and that it conferred grace apart from faith, as a repudiation of the gospel.

But what of the differences raised by the Anabaptists and, later, the Baptists,

over baptism? Is the baptism of infants, which Baptists say is not according

to the institution of Christ, sufficient to make a group no longer a church?

In nineteenth-century America, some Baptists thought so. The Landmark

Baptists took the Reformation marks, measured the neighboring Method­

ists and Presbyterians, and found them wanting. They termed their assem­

blies religious societies but not gospel churches, because they did not prac­

tice the ordinances as Jesus had instructed. They would not practice pulpit

exchange with the ministers of such groups, nor do anything that could be

construed as a tacit acceptance of them as true churches.

There are a number of problems with the claims of the Landmark

Baptists, but the most serious is a failure to make a distinction between

what is essential to the church's nature and what is important but not

essential. In other words, they fail to distinguish between issues of being

and issues of well-being. The gospel pertains to the essential nature of

the church, and one of the criteria by which an act qualifies as a sacra­

ment among Protestants has been its appropriateness as a symbol of the

33
gospel. Thus, Miroslav Volf says that baptism and the Lord's Supper

"belong to the essence of the church, for they have to do with faith and

its confession. . . . But the sacraments are an indispensable condition

of ecclesiality only if they are a form of the confession of faith and an

expression of faith,":" It seems therefore that if a practice of the sacra­

ments ( or ordinances) amounts to a repudiation of the gospel, then it

33. Stanley Grenz says that an ordinance, or sacrament, "must be so closely linked to the gospel

message . . . that it becomes a symbol for the truth of the good news it embodies:' Stanley Grenz,

Theology for the Community of God (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1994), 676.

34. Miroslav Volf, "Community Formation as an Image of the Triune God;' in Community

Formation in the Early Church and in the Church Today, ed. Richard Longenecker (Peabody,

MA: Hendrickson, 2002), 2 1 7 - 1 8 . Elmer Towns and Ed Stetzer, Perimeters of Light: Biblical

Boundaries for the Emerging Church (Chicago: Moody, 2004), 68, also say that baptism and the

Lord's Supper are "essential elements without which a true church cannot exist;' but they do not

comment on whether a particular view of baptism and the Lord's Supper is also requisite.
72 CHAPTER2

would strike at the being, or nature, or essence of the church. But if an

observance of baptism is not as Jesus instituted, but is not a threat to the

gospel, the practice may hinder the well-being of the church, but does

not undermine its being or nature. It may be a valid church, but, like all

churches on earth, imperfect in some respects.

This position corresponds with the biblical teaching on baptism and

the Lord's Supper. They are clearly an essential part of the church's life

but not all improper administrations of them strike at the church's nature.

The Reformers included proper administration of the sacraments in their

marks of the church due to the seriousness of their disagreement with

Catholic teaching on the Mass, but the sacraments are not as prominent in

biblical teaching as are other elements that do belong to the very nature of

the church. An improper administration of baptism and the Lord's Supper

will hinder the church's health and weaken its ministry, but it does not

necessarily invalidate the church, unless the impropriety compromises the

message of the gospel.

We may derive three conclusions from our examination of these two

major formulations of the marks of the church.

First, both seem to be responsive to and shaped by the historical

contexts in which they were formed. The creedal formulation of "one,

holy, catholic, and apostolic" helped the patristic church fathers respond

to the challenges they faced from various heretical groups in their day,

and the Reformation marks reflect the Reformers' conviction that much

of the Roman Catholic Church of their day had lost the gospel in their

preaching and were practicing the sacraments in a way that obscured

rather than portrayed the gospel. This responsiveness suggests that

perhaps the development of marks of the church is an ongoing task as

35
churches face new challenges.

Second, both sets of marks serve to some degree as goals toward

which churches should strive as well as marks of their genuineness or

validity. There is certainly room for improvement in terms of expres­

sions of unity, room for growth toward maturity in holiness, a need for

further missionary expansion of the church's catholicity, and a need for

sharper understanding of apostolic teaching. There must also be peren-

35. For example, the prominence of parachurch groups in contemporary North American evangelical

Christianity calls for thoughtful ways to distinguish churches and parachurch groups. In chapter

10, I suggest that a certain fullness of ministries assigned to churches are a mark distinguishing

churches from parachurch groups.

THEMARKSOFTHECHURCH 73

nial watchfulness that our preaching presents the gospel message clearly,

and that our practice of the Lord's Supper and baptism aptly portrays

and symbolizes that message.

Third, both the classical and Reformation marks seem to coalesce

around the gospel. It underlies, shapes, and frames the church's unity, holi­

ness, catholicity, and apostolicity; it is the message preached and presented

in the sacraments. It is a true sine qua non of a true church.

 C H A P T E R 3

THE ESSENCE O F THE CHURCH

Theological Conclusions and Practical Applications

WE WILL NOW GATHER ALL OUR data from Scripture and history into

five theological conclusions about the essence of the church. Then, since

doctrine should govern and guide practice, we will derive practical appli­

cations from our theology for life and ministry in local church contexts.

We are dealing here only with what we see as essential to the church, not

articulating a comprehensive description of it. There are many other issues

that relate to the health, well-being, and proper order of a church; we will

deal with them in the following chapters. Our present concern is with those

things that seem intrinsically connected to the very being of the church.

THE CHURCH: GOD'S ORGANIZED,

PURPOSEFUL ASSEMBLY

This one conclusion really contains four theological affirmations,

each with practical implications for ministry. First, our study of Scripture

shows that the nature of the church centers on God. The church is those

called out by God-called to be God's people, Christ's body, and the Spir­

it's temple. It is not a human invention or a social club. It is God's assembly.

75
76 CHAPTER3

Therefore, the church's first concern must be to please God. To have

a growing church is good; to have a church full of pleased people may

be desirable, but the church belongs to God, and the point is pleasing

him. That means that all programs, events, activities, and priorities must

contribute in some way to that goal. Pleasing God begins in the heart, with

an attitude that honors God, but it must also include the mind, with the

search to understand God's will for the church. Rather than following the

latest program or what seems to be working elsewhere or what the people

want, our first recourse should be to consult Scripture, seeking to under­

1
stand God's design for the church.

Second, as God's organized assembly, the church is and must be

what God says it is and must be. The church is not just any grouping

of people, or even any group of Christians. It is not free to organize

itself as it chooses; it is God's assembly. Since God is a God of order

(1 Cor. 1 4 : 3 3 , 40), we should expect God's assembly to be an ordered

one. This is confirmed by New Testament teaching. We find references

to authorized leaders of the assemblies from the earliest days. On their

first missionary journey, Paul and Barnabas, immediately after plant­

ing churches, "appointed elders for them in each church" (Acts 1 4 : 2 3 ) .

There was a recognized membership, such that Luke could record the

number of those who joined in Acts 2 : 4 1 and 4:4, and Paul could make

a clear distinction between those outside and inside the church ( 1 Cor.

5 : 1 2 - 1 3 ) . Th e nature and role of the church's leaders and the govern­

mental pattern of the church have been understood in a variety of ways

in church history, and many conclude that the New Testament teaching

on church order or polity is not sufficiently clear and detailed to autho­

rize a single pattern as biblical. Here may be another place where the

distinction is between being and well-being. There is enough biblical

teaching about order to conclude that some type of order is essential to

the church; which pattern is most consistent with New Testament teach­

ing and thus most conducive to the well-being of the church is a matter

1. A more comprehensive list of characteristics relating to the nature of the church is found in Gregg

Allison, Sojourners and Strangers: 1he Doctrine of the Church (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2012), 103-

57. He lists doxological, logocentric, and pneumadynamic as "characteristics regarding the origin

and orientation of the church'' and covenantal, confessional, missional, and spatio-temporal/

eschatological as "characteristics regarding the gathering and sending of the church'' (103, 123).

I believe there is a good measure of overlap between my five conclusions and Allison's seven

characteristics, but they are couched in very different language and with some distinctions as well.
THE ESSENCE OF THE CHURCH 77

that has not been equally clear in the history of the church, and which
2
will receive our full attention in a later chapter.

Craig Van Gelder links the ideas of organized and purposeful in his

missiological ecclesiology. He writes: '' The church is. The church does what it

is. The church organizes what it does" He adds, "The ministry of the church

flows out of the church's nature." Though he does not use the word "purpose­

ful;' that would seem implicit in the link between the church's nature and its

ministry. One point where Van Gelder would differ from this present work

is in seeing importance in the sequence of nature, ministry and then organi­

zation, with organization "designed to support the ministry of the church"?

But, as argued above, while organization does support the ministry of the

church, it is also biblically mandated and thus the rationale for organization

may not be limited to just the support of the ministry of the church.

But Van Gelder's ideas would seem to support the third affirmation

to be made from the statement above; namely, that the church exists for

certain purposes. It is a purposeful assembly. If some Christians gather, but

do nothing, they are not a church. The New Testament presents the church

in action with such consistent regularity that we may speak of certain

ministries as essential to a true church. A church that did not proclaim the

gospel would not be a church; a church that did not assemble for worship

or did not teach its people or did not experience fellowship would not be a

church. We will argue later that there are at least five constitutive purposes

of the church. Churches perform those ministries with differing degrees

of effectiveness, but churches are marked as churches by their possession

5
of a fullness of ministry, assigned to them by God.

Fourth, the church is an assembly. The church is not just people whom

God has called out; he has also called them together. We noted earlier

that the Greek translation of the Old Testament used the word ekklesia

seventy-three times to translate one of the Hebrew words used for God's

people (qahiil), but never for the other (cedah). The reason is that the

former has the idea of an actual assembly while the latter does not. We also

saw that Paul refers to the Christians within a city as the church of the city

2. Biblical teaching on church order falls under the topic of church polity, which is discussed in

Part 3, chapters 6-9.

3. Craig Van Gelder, The Essence of the Church: A Community Created by the Spirit ( Grand Rapids:

Baker, 2000), 37. Italics in original.

4. Ibid.

5. For more, see the discussion in chapter 10.

78 CHAPTER3

(such as the church in Cenchrea or the church in Corinth) while he refers

to the Christians in a province as the churches of the province (such as

the Galatian churches or the Macedonian churches). One possible reason

for this distinction is that the Christians in a city could (and did) actually

assemble, while those scattered over a wider area could not. Paul tended

to reserve the term church for those groups that actually assembled ( with

the exception of the universal church usage, which appears primarily in

Ephesians and Colossians).

Whether all the members of the church must assemble together at

the same time is a more difficult question. Some have questioned the

legitimacy of multisite churches for claiming to be one church while

never assembling together in one place. They reason, "The church is an

assembly. The word ekklesia can even be translated 'assembly" How can

a group be an assembly if they never assemblei"" There has also been one

notable critique of the even more widespread practice of having multiple

services over a number of hours, especially as an alternative to building

8
larger buildings.

While we will give more thorough consideration to multi-site

churches in a later chapter," at this point we will simply note that the size

of the church in Jerusalem (three thousand and more from the day of

Pentecost onward) and the prominent mention of houses as the meeting

places of churches in the New Testament suggest that the church in cities

like Jerusalem, Rome, Corinth and elsewhere was composed of a network

of groups meeting in houses.'? Though they rarely (if ever) all assembled

together, the church in a given city is always referred to in the New Testa­

ment in the singular ("the church"), and is described as acting together as

one church (see Acts 6:5; 1 1 : 2 2 ; 1 5 : 2 2 ) and experiencing relational unity

6. See Acts 19:32, 39, 4 1 .

7. This critique is made by numerous contributors to the 9Marks efournal (May/June 2009):

42-66; by Thomas White and John Yeats, Franchising McChurch: Feeding Our Obsession with

Easy Christianity (Colorado Springs: David C. Cook, 2009), 82-83; and by Grant Gaines, "One

Church in One Location: Questioning the Biblical, Theological, and Historical Claims of the

Multisite Movement" (PhD diss., Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, 2 0 1 3 ) .

8. This has been the position of Mark Dever and Capitol Hill Baptist Church in Washington, DC.

Though their attendance strains the capacity of their worship space, and though their location

precludes the expansion of their building, they have still not adopted the use of multiple services

due to the importance they attach to the church gathering. See Mark Dever and Paul Alexander,

The Deliberate Church: Building Your Ministry on the Gospel (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2005), 86-87.

9. See chapter 12.

10. See the argument in Roger Gehring, House Church and Mission: The Importance of Household

Structures in Early Christianity (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2004).

THE ESSENCE OF THE CHURCH 79

(Acts 4 : 3 2 ) . Moreover, it would be extremely rare for most churches (espe­

cially larger churches) to ever have 1 0 0 % of their members present on a

Sunday morning, so assembling all members together in one place at one

time should probably not be seen as something mandatory for a church's

being. But some degree of assembling may be necessary for a church to

fulfill some of its purposes.

The emphasis on assembly has two practical applications. First, it

highlights the importance of fellowship for the church. The event usually

seen as marking the birth of the church, the descent of the Holy Spirit

in Acts 2, is also where we first encounter the word fellowship (koino­

nia) in the New Testament. It is as if that first group of Christians was

bonded together into an assembly by a gift brought by the Spirit, a gift

called fellowship. If this is so, then fellowship is no mere diversion from

the real work of the church; it is the work of the church, or the work of

the Holy Spirit in the church. Churches need to work intentionally and

thoughtfully at providing the contexts in which this type of Spirit-given

fellowship is nurtured.

As a second application, the church as an assembly serves as a help­

ful reminder to individualistic North Americans that the New Testament

teaching on the church is corporate through and through. The very word

church and every image for the church is corporate, involving people being

assembled together in face-to-face relationships. Thus joining the church

should be a momentous step in which the individual surrenders a degree

of personal autonomy, accepting the discipline of the body and accept­

ing responsibilities for and commitments to the corporate body. This was

reflected in earlier Baptist practice by members covenanting together.

Such a commitment was what constituted individuals members of a body.

Paul reflects the link that is established among the members of the

assembly when he says, "If one part suffers, every part suffers with it; if

one part is honored, every part rejoices with if' ( 1 Cor. 1 2 : 2 6 ) . Too often

today, church members are unaware of or unconcerned about their fellow

members' suffering, and envy one another's blessings. But when we realize

that those sufferings and blessings are ours, because we are one with other

persons as fellow members of one body, bonded together in one assembly,

how different the perspective! This corporate perspective of the Christian

life is something particularly needed among American Christians. It is

implicit in the idea of the church as an assembly, a group bonded together

by the Spirit's gift of fellowship.

80 CHAPTER3

THE CHURCH: PRIMARILY A LOCAL ASSEMBLY

This second conclusion is true in terms of both biblical usage and

personal experience. We noted earlier that out of 1 1 4 occurrences of

ekklesia in the New Testament, at least ninety refer to a local church or

churches. There is a valid usage of ekklesia to refer to all the redeemed of

all the ages, the universal church or larger body of Christ, but it is second­

ary in terms of biblical prominence. Furthermore, the church that Chris­

tians attend and in which they minister is a local assembly of God's people.

This would seem so obvious as not to need saying, were it not for the fact

that much of what is written on the church focuses on the universal church.

The patristic formulation of the church as one, holy, catholic, and apostolic

seems to apply more readily to the universal than to the local church, and

when the Reformers affirmed the Nicene Creed's statement on the church,

they saw it as applying more to the invisible than to the visible church.

By contrast, when the Bible discusses the church, it is overwhelmingly

the local church that is in view. This pattern has at least three practical appli­

cations. First, Christians who belong to no local church but claim to belong

to the body of Christ, referring to the church universal, are living contrary

to the biblical pattern, which gives priority to the local church. Second, those

who work in or with parachurch groups are not thus exempted from their

need to be involved in a local church, both to serve others and to be served by

the fuller ministry of the church. Third, we need to recognize the dignity and

honor given to the local church. When Jesus says, "I will build my church"

(Matt. 1 6 : 1 8 ) , or when Paul says, "Christ loved the church" (Eph. 5:25), or

prays 'To him [God] be glory in the church" ( 3 : 2 1 ) , these passages may well

refer to the universal church. But how is Christ's building of the church seen

in the world today? Where do we see Christ loving his church? Where is God

being glorified today? The answer in each case is in local churches. Despite all

their obvious flaws, God loves real, local churches, not some invisible ideal.

THE CHURCH: BY ITS NATURE A

LIVING AND GROWING ASSEMBLY

This conclusion is obvious in the comparison of the church to a body,

but is also clearly implied in the image of the church as a building or

temple that is made of "living stones" ( 1 Peter 2 : 5 ) . In 1 Corinthians 3:9,

the church is also compared to a field, where it is God who "makes things

grow" ( 1 C o r . 3 : 7 ) . This conclusion concerning the essence of the church

raises two areas of practical applications.

THE ESSENCE OF THE CHURCH 81

If the church is living, change is inevitable. Change is part of life,

and the church has obviously evidenced change throughout its history.

Churches today are noticeably different from churches a hundred years

ago, not to mention a thousand years ago. The difficulty is in evaluating

any given change. Is it helpful and healthy, dangerous and destructive, or

neutral and indifferent? Certainly the Bible does not spell out every aspect

of church life, and thus churches are free to be innovative and creative

in some aspects. Furthermore, as God's people mature in their under­

standing of Scripture, there should be change as they grow in obedience.

Baptists believe that certain aspects of scriptural teaching concerning the

church were misunderstood by the great majority of churches for centu­

ries. Change came as people continued to search the Scriptures. As John

Robinson said to the pilgrims as they departed for America, "The Lord has

more truth yet to break forth out of his holy Word:'

One powerful factor affecting how God's people see Scripture is their
11
cultural context. The culture can at times shed light on the pages of the

Bible, or it can blind people to the teaching of the Bible. For example,

Baptists believe the Bible has always taught congregational government,

but it became popular only as the cultural context began to favor demo­

cratic government. The rise of democracy in Western culture may have

helped people to see what had always been in Scripture. Other examples

are more problematic. For example, it seems undeniable that the grow­

ing prominence of business in American life affected churches in the

twentieth century. Pastors often began to think of themselves as chief

executive officers, with deacons as the board of trustees. This idea of

leadership seems to clash with the biblical idea of servant shepherd lead­

ership. Among some seeker churches today, the goal is for the church

to feel similar to a shopping mall, and consumerism is shaping church

12
life in a variety of ways. Are these changes simply new ways to relate

the gospel in an intelligible way to today's culture, or have our changes

accommodated culture in ways that are antithetical to the gospel?

Change is inevitable, because the church is alive, not static. But change

needs to be thoughtfully evaluated, lest we find ourselves sinfully captive

11. Since the Bible was written in an Ancient Near Eastern context, this presents special concerns

for Western readers. See Richards and O'Brien, Misreading Scripture with Western Eyes.

12. See Bruce Shelley and Marshall Shelley, Consumer Church: Can Evangelicals Win the World

without Losing Their Souls? (Downers Grove, IL: Inter Varsity, 1992), for some of the effects of

consumerism on churches.
82 CHAPTER3

to culture, as has happened all too often in the history of the church. In

fact, in a recent book, Alan Wolfe argues that churches in America have

been virtually transformed by their interaction with culture. He says,

"In every aspect of the religious life, American faith has met American

culture-and American culture has triumphed.?"

Of course, one reason why the church has often accommodated culture,
14
especially in the past hundred years, has been the desire to grow. Growth,

especially numerical growth, is assumed among many Baptists to be the

most important goal of any church and the most significant barometer of

a church's health and success. The New Testament, especially the book of

Acts, records dramatic growth in the early church. Three thousand converts

were added on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2 : 4 1 ) ; the number soon grew to

more than five thousand men (4:4); Acts 6:7 states that "the number of disci­

ples . . . increased rapidly"; by Acts 9, the church all over Judea, Galilee, and

Samaria was growing "in numbers" (v. 3 1 ) . Later on, the churches planted

by Paul "grew daily in numbers" ( 1 6 : 5 ) . But for all the obvious evidence and

expectation of growth, it does not seem to have been a stated goal of the

New Testament churches. There are no records of Paul reproving a church

for not growing, or even giving commands and exhortations concern­

ing personal evangelism. This is all the more striking when we remember

that Paul sharply reproved churches for division, heretical teachings, and

immoral behavior. There are also sections of Paul's letters filled with numer­

ous commands. Romans 1 2 : 9 - 2 1 contains about twenty commands regard­

ing a whole host of attitudes and actions, but nothing like "proclaim the

gospel;' or "share the good news with your friends:' First Thessalonians

5:12-22 is another long list of imperatives, with the same omission.

What are we to make of this New Testament pattern of dramatic

church growth when there is surprisingly little emphasis on it? There are

no doubt a number of factors involved, and we will try to give them all

due consideration when we return to the issue of evangelism as one of

the constitutive ministries of the church. In relationship to the essence of

the church, however, there seems to be one important implication. To the

degree that the church lives in accord with its own essential being, growth

will occur. In some contexts, the growth may be primarily spiritual. For

13. Alan Wolfe, The Transformation of American Religion: How We Actually Live Our Faith (New

York: The Free Press, 2003), 3.

14. Ibid., 74-81.

THE ESSENCE OF THE CHURCH 83

example, in Ephesians 4, the outcome of the body functioning normally

is that «we will grow to become in every respect the mature body of him

who is the head, that is, Christ" (Eph. 4 : 1 5 ) . In other words, the church

will grow in spiritual maturity and Christlikeness. Other situations may

be like that reflected in Acts 2, where, as the church lived its life in the

power of the Spirit, «the Lord added to their number daily those who were

being saved" ( v. 4 7 ) . Certainly, the church bore witness to Christ, as he had

promised they would (Acts 1 : 8 ) , but the growth is seen as the work of God.

In fact, the teaching of Paul and the pattern of Acts seem to indicate that

churches should focus on obedience to Christ's command, «Follow me";

the results in terms of growth must be entrusted to Christ, who promised

those who follow him, «I will make you fishers of men" (Matt. 4 : 1 9 , ssv).

This does not mean that evangelism does not need to be taught,

modeled, encouraged, and intentional in the church's life. It does not mean

that we must get everything right and then the church will automatically

grow. The New Testament churches that grew were very imperfect. But if

ultimately it is «God who makes things grow" ( 1 Cor. 3 : 7 ) , or it is the Lord

who adds to the church (Acts 2:47), we should not wonder if the Lord does

not add many new members to sick, deformed, unhealthy churches. The

goal of the church is to live the life God has given it. To the degree that it

does, it will experience God-given growth.

THE CHURCH: A GOSPEL ASSEMBLY

The gospel message is itself the call that brings the assembly together

and connects it to Christ. The gospel is prior to the church and the church

exists because of it. Therefore, if the church ever loses the gospel, it ceases

to be a church. The Reformers were right to insist on the preaching of the

gospel as a mark of the true church. Proper teaching on church polity and

worship and other aspects may be essential to the well-being of the church;

the gospel is essential to its being. Moreover, as we saw earlier, the gospel is

central to the four classical marks of the church. The gospel sets the bound­

ary of the extent of the church's unity; the church's holiness is a gift given in

the gospel; its catholicity stems from the fact that the gospel is for all; and its

apostolicity is in following the gospel given in the apostolic writings.

Therefore, the church cannot be indifferent to doctrinal orthodoxy. Paul

warned the Ephesian elders of the danger posed to their church by those

who would «distort the truth" (Acts 20:30). He commanded the churches in

Galatia to consider anyone who preached another gospel to them as anath-

84 CHAPTER3

ema, or under God's condemnation (Gal. 1 : 8 - 9 ) . One qualification for the

elders Titus was to appoint was their ability to "encourage others by sound

doctrine and refute those who oppose if' (Titus 1 : 9 ) . By contrast, in the case

of those whose preaching of the true gospel was accompanied by impure

motives, Paul's response was joy rather than rebuke: "The important thing

is that in every way, whether from false motives or true, Christ is preached.

And because of this I rejoice" (Phil. 1 : 1 8 ) . The purity of their message was

more important than the purity of their motives.

Churches may and do differ on things like form of government, mode

of baptism, and numerous other issues. The same church cannot be both

congregationally governed and episcopally ruled; it cannot practice believ­

er's baptism only and infant baptism. Of course, I believe Baptists are right

in their interpretation of these issues; that is why I am a Baptist. But I do

not think that makes all those who disagree no longer valid churches, any

more than I would think a Baptist church that mistakenly baptizes someone

who is not a believer thereby becomes invalid because they have erred on

believer's baptism. Churches can be and are valid and yet imperfect. But if a

church errs on the gospel, they have become not just imperfect, but invalid;

they are no longer a church, according to the biblical portrayal of the church.

THE CHURCH: A SPIRIT-EMPOWERED ASSEMBLY

The people of God must have enjoyed something of the power of the

Holy Spirit in the Old Testament. Without his ministry, how could anyone

have been convicted of sin or have understood God's Word? Yet it is clear

that there was also a sense in which the Spirit was not given prior to what

John calls Iesuss glorification (John 7 : 3 9 ) . After Christ's resurrection and

ascension, the Spirit was poured out at Pentecost, changing the group of

Iesuss disciples from a group into a church.

As we have already noted, the gospel writer Luke never uses the word

ekklesia prior to Acts 2, but it is found twenty times in the book of Acts

after that chapter. The metaphor of the temple of the Spirit implies that the

Spirit dwells in a special way in the church. We speak rather readily of the

ministry of the Holy Spirit indwelling the individual believer, and rightly

so, for it is biblical teaching. But we do not often ponder the teaching that

when believers are "built together" they "become a dwelling in which God

lives by his Spirit" (Eph. 2 : 2 2 ) . Could this be why Paul says that when

the church in Corinth is assembled that "the power of our Lord Jesus is

present;' and that the actions of the church in exercising discipline on an

THE ESSENCE OF THE CHURCH 85

individual have a profound spiritual impact on that person's life? Is it the

Spirit's power in the church that accounts for the power of the church to

use the keys of the kingdom in ways that call down the power of heaven

(Matt. 1 6 : 1 9 ; 1 8 : 1 8 ) ? Early Baptists had a robust confidence in the power

and competence of the church to govern its own affairs; that confidence

can be linked to the empowering presence of the Spirit in the church.

Some of the earliest church fathers recognized the presence of the Spirit

in a special way in the church. The second-century bishop Irenaeus virtually

identified the church with the presence of the Spirit: "For where the Church

is, there is the Spirit of God; and where the Spirit is, there is the Church and

every kind of grace?" Augustine went even further to say that the Spirit acts

as the animating principle in the church: "What the soul is in our body, the

Holy Spirit is in the body of Christ, which is the Church'?"

More recently, the power of the Holy Spirit has been evident in the

movement that emphasizes the Spirit's presence among us, the Pente­

costals. Despite its many doctrinal aberrations, serious ones in some

cases, Pentecostalism has grown from no adherents prior to 1 9 0 0 to,

a century later, a worldwide movement encompassing more than five

17
hundred million believers in more than ten thousand denominations.

After nearly four hundred years of history and the work of thousands of

missionaries, Baptists worldwide number about a tenth as many follow­

ers. Numbers alone can be very misleading, but might they not also

in this case point to the importance of the Spirit as the empowering

agent of the church? Whatever their many faults may be, most Pentecos­

tal churches rely upon and call upon the Spirit to empower them in an

emphasis that Baptists would do well to ponder and learn from. Without

the Spirit, the church is a dead body; his presence makes the church

alive. In an age that increasingly utilizes demographic study and market

analyses, we need to remember anew that, as it was with the rebuilding

of God's temple long ago, so it is with the building of temples of living

stones in churches today: '«Not by might nor by power, but by my Spirit;

says the LORD Almighty" (Zech. 4 : 6 ) .

15. Irenaeus, "Against Heresies;' 3.24.1, in The Ante-Nicene Fathers.

16. Augustine, Sermo 267.4.4, in J.-P. Migne, Patrologia Latina (Turnholti, Belgium: Brepols, n.d.),

38:1231.

17. These numbers are from David Barrett, ed., World Christian Encyclopedia, 2d ed. (Oxford, UK/

New York: Oxford University Press, 2 0 0 1 ) , 4. Barrett groups Pentecostals and charismatics

together and projects their number to grow to more than one billion by 2050.
86 CHAPTER3

STUDY QUESTIONS FOR PART 1

1 . Why did the first Christians choose the word ekklesia to describe

their gatherings?

2. What implications should we draw from the fact that the New Testa­

ment overwhelmingly uses the word ekklesia in a local sense to refer

to actual local churches?

3 . Which image of the church do you find most helpful? Why? Are

there images other than those discussed that you think should be

included? What would they add to our understanding of the nature

of the church?

4. Do you think most Christians think of themselves in individualistic

terms or as part of a group ( a people, body, or temple)? How does

this affect how one lives the Christian life?

5. How would you respond to the question, «Where can I find the true

church!" How would Augustine or Luther have responded?

6. Can you identify common ideas about the church that seem more

shaped by cultural influences than biblical teaching? How about

practices in your church? Are some more cultural than biblical?

7. Which of the five theological conclusions in the last part of chapter 3

do you think has the most relevance for churches today?

8. What in these chapters encourages you about the church? What in

these chapters challenges your previous ideas about the church?

What could you apply in a practical way in your life and ministry in

your church?

BOOKS FOR FURTHER STUDY

Allison, Gregg. Sojourners and Strangers: The Doctrine of the Church. Whea­

ton, IL: Crossway, 2 0 1 2 . This is a major work in the series Foundations of

Evangelical Theology, with a significant and thought provoking section

on the nature of the church, though under the rubric of characteristics.

Clowney, Edmund. The Church. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1 9 9 5 .

This is a text on ecclesiology from a Reformed point of view, with

helpful discussion of some of the images of the church and the four

classical marks of the church.

Dever, Mark. Nine Marks of a Healthy Church. Rev. and expanded ed.

Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2000. Dever has written numerous very help-
THE ESSENCE OF THE CHURCH 87

ful articles and books on ecclesiology. This is his most comprehensive

work, which has exercised wide influence through the organization

named after it, 9Marks, which advocates for healthy churches through

publishing books, offering conferences and an intensive weekend

experience at Capitol Hill Baptist Church.

Dulles, Avery. Models of the Church. Expanded ed. New York: Double­

day, 1 9 8 7 . This important book by Father and later Cardinal Dulles

looks not at the biblical images, but at the most significant models that

have emerged over the course of history, such as institution, mystical

communion, sacrament, herald, and servant.

George, Timothy. "Toward an Evangelical Ecclesiology:' In Catholics and

Evangelicals: Do They Share a Common Future? edited by Thomas

Rausch. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2000. In this essay, George

looks at the four classical marks of the church, the Reformation signs

of the true church, and discusses how both may be appropriated

within an evangelical ecclesiology.

Hellerman, Joseph. When the Church Was a Family: Recapturing Jesus'

Vision for Authentic Christian Community. Nashville: B & H Academic,

2009. This is the book that pointed to the evidence in Scripture that

the family is the most prominent and pervasive image for the church

in the New Testament, and brings out the meaning of that image in

numerous helpful ways.

Kung, Hans. The Church. Garden City, NY: Image Books, 1 9 7 6 . Though

a Catholic, Kiing approaches the church in this work from a largely

Protestant perspective, organizing much of his discussion around the

same three images noted in this chapter.

Minear, Paul S. Images of the Church in the New Testament. Philadelphia:

Westminster Press, 1960. This is the most thorough study of all the

biblical images for the church. Minear catalogs ninety-six, though

many do not really seem to relate to the church at all.

Van Gelder, Craig. The Essence of the Church: A Community Created by the

Spirit. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2000. Van Gelder combines expertise in

missiology, theology, and social sciences to give a helpful discussion

of how a proper view of the church's essence should shape the nature,

ministry, and organization of North American churches.

 PART 2

WH O IS THE CHURCH?
 C H A P T E R 4

REGENERATE CHURCH

MEMBERSHIP

The Baptist Mark of the Church

IN CHAPTER 2, WE CONSIDERED TWO major formulations of the nature of

the church developed in church history. In the patristic era, the church

was described as one, holy, catholic, and apostolic, thus giving us the four

classical marks of the church. The Reformers, seeing the four classical

notae as applying more to the invisible than to the visible church, gave two

additional marks by which one may ascertain if a specific congregation is

a true church of God. They stated that wherever one finds the pure preach­

ing of the Word and the right administration of the sacraments, there one

may be sure there is a true church.

In this chapter, we look at a third way to look at the church, what we

may call the Baptist mark of the church. This mark differs from the previous

two formulations in that it does not so much answer the question, "What

is the church?" as the question, "Who is the church?" That is, central to

the Baptist vision of the church is the insistence that the church must be

composed of believers only. That is the distinctive mark of the church for

Baptists and others who fall within the stream of those who advocate what

91
92 CHAPTER4

is sometimes called the gathered church, or more often today, the believers'

1
church. This mark may also be called the principle of regenerate church

membership. At the first Baptist World Congress in 1905, J. D. Freeman said

of Baptists, "This principle of a regenerated Church membership, more than

anything else, marks our distinctiveness in the Christian world today'? More

recently, Justice Anderson has affirmed its centrality for the Baptist doctrine

of the church: "The cardinal principle of Baptist ecclesiology, and logically,

the point of departure for church polity, is the insistence on a regenerate

membership in the local congregation." To put it simply, regenerate church

membership is meaningful church membership, involving only those with a

genuine commitment to Christ and the congregation of Christ's people. This

ideal of regenerate membership has been central to Baptist ecclesiology.

We trace the development and importance of this idea of the church as

composed of believers to answer the question, "Who is the church?" Our

discussion is divided into two chapters. First, in chapter 4, we briefly review

the biblical rationale for this view of the church, look at the historical devel­

opments that allowed this idea of the church to become obscured and even­

tually opposed, even by Reformers like Luther, Zwingli, and Calvin, and,

most important, we show how the principle of regenerate church member­

ship became the central principle of Baptist ecclesiology. Then, in chapter

5, we examine how and why North American Baptists over the past one

hundred years virtually abandoned this principle, becoming hardly recog­

nizable as historically Baptist. We conclude chapter 5 with some suggestions

as to why and how this principle may be recovered in Baptist churches today.

1. Donald Durnbaugh, The Believers' Church: The History and Character of Radical Protestantism

(New York: Macmillan, 1968), ix, traces the origin of the phrase to Max Weber's classic work,

The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, in which he used it to describe the Anabaptists

and Quakers. It gained more currency with the revival of Anabaptist studies more than fifty

years ago, and in two conferences that organized around the phrase. The first was held by

Mennonites in 1955, the Study Conference on the Believers' Church. The second was larger and

more broadly based, with 150 participants from seven denominational families, and was held at

Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky, in 1967. The papers from that

conference were published in James Leo Garrett Jr., ed., The Concept of the Believers' Church:

Addresses from the 1967 Louisville Conference (Scottdale, PA: Herald Press, 1969). There have

been seven additional such conferences since 1967, with the most recent in 1990, on the campus

of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth, Texas.

2. J. D. Freeman, "The Place of Baptists in the Christian Church:' in The Baptist World Congress:

London, July 1 1 - 1 9 , 1905, Authorised Record of Proceedings (London: Baptist Union Publication

Department, 1905), 27.

3. Justice C. Anderson, "Old Baptist Principles Reset:' Southwestern Journal of Theology 31 (Spring

1989): 5 - 1 2 .
REGENERATE CHURCH MEMBERSHIP 93

THE BIBLICAL RATIONALE F O R

REGENERATE CHURCH MEMBERSHIP

The biblical basis for seeing the church as composed exclusively of

believers is so strong and obvious that the difficulty is in seeing how this

idea was ever obscured. The very idea of the church as the called-out ones

presupposes that the members of the church have heard and responded to

God's call. The image of the church as the people of God assumes that these

are people who belong to God. They are referred to more than sixty times as

saints, or holy ones (hagioi), or people set aside for devotion to God. They

are the ones who believe in Christ and are bound to one another by the

Holy Spirit. The church is the body of Christ, and believers form one body

in Christ (Rom. 1 2 : 5 ) . A common possession of Christ is the ground of the

church's unity. The church shares "one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God

and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all" (Eph. 4:5-6). It

is difficult to see how the church could be described as the body of Christ or

the temple of the Spirit if some of the members of the body or some of the

living stones in the temple had no connection with Christ or the Spirit. The

very distinction in the New Testament between the church and the world

indicates that the church differs from the world, and does so because the

church is composed of those who believe in Christ, belong to God, and are

bound together by the Spirit. The church is obviously composed of believers.

Some might acknowledge the strength of this argument but seek to

limit its application to the universal church. That church, by definition,

is composed of believers only, all believers of all time. The local church,

they may say, only imperfectly reflects that ideal. We cannot know with

certainty the state of anyone's heart and thus we have to accept that local

churches cannot be composed of believers only, due to the limitations we

4
have as humans. But four factors weaken this line of thought.

First, simply as a matter of logic, if the universal church is composed

of all believers, it seems that the goal of local churches should be to come

as close to that same standard as possible. Certainly we may fail, but we

need not make a virtue of our limitations. In many areas, biblical stan­

dards are above our ability to reach perfectly, but that does not justify

4. Luther objected to the Anabaptist practice oflimiting baptism and church membership to those

who were believers due to the uncertainty or difficulty of knowing who has faith. He writes,

"Have they now become gods so that they can discern the hearts of men and know whether

or not they believe?" See Martin Luther, "Concerning Rebaptism," in Martin Luther's Basic

Theological Writings, 3 5 1 .
94 CHAPTER4

lowering those standards. In the same way, we should retain the ideal of a

membership of all believers as the goal for local churches, even if we must

acknowledge imperfectly reaching that ideal in practice.

Second, it seems as if the New Testament anticipates the possibility

that local churches will inadvertently allow false members to creep in, and

provides for it. That provision is church discipline, which is applied to

"anyone who claims to be a brother or sister" but denies that claim by

his life (see 1 Cor. 5 : 1 1 ) . He is put out of the church, both in the hope

that he will repent and in order to keep the church pure. If the church is

not intended to be a pure body of genuine believers, what is the point of

1 Corinthians 5 and other New Testament teaching on church discipline?

Third, the descriptions of local churches in the New Testament

assume that these local, visible congregations are composed of believers

only. The church of God in Corinth is called "those sanctified in Christ

Jesus" ( 1 Cor. 1 : 2 ) . The letter to the Ephesians is addressed to "God's holy

people in Ephesus, the faithful in Christ Jesus" (Eph. 1 : 1 ) . The letter to

the church in Philippi is sent "to all God's holy people in Christ Jesus"

(Phil. 1 : 1 ) . Paul wrote to "God's holy people . . . the faithful brothers and

sisters in Christ" at Colossae (Col. 1 : 2 ) . The church of the Thessalonians is

described in both letters as a church in "God the Father and the Lord Jesus

Christ" ( 1 Thess. 1 : 1 ; 2 Thess. 1 : 2 ) . Clearly, Paul thought he was addressing

bodies of Christians.

Finally, local churches in Acts gathered only those who believed. On

the day of Pentecost, the church in Jerusalem was constituted by those

who "accepted his [Peter's] message" (Acts 2 : 4 1 ) . Those who were added

in subsequent days were those "who were being saved" or those who

heard the message of the apostles and believed (v. 47; 4 : 4 ) . The church in

Antioch began when "a great number of people believed and turned to

the Lord" ( 1 1 : 2 1 ) . Near the end of their first missionary journey, Paul and

Barnabas visited the churches they had established and encouraged them

to stay true to their commitment as believers ( 1 4 : 2 1 - 2 3 ) . The clear impli­

cation is that those churches were composed of believers. The church in

Philippi began when the Lord opened the heart of a woman named Lydia

to respond to Paul's message ( 1 6 : 1 4 ) . Paul's regular strategy was to enter a

city, preach the gospel, and organize those who responded into churches.

He operated with the assumption of regenerate church membership.

Thus the objection that regenerate church membership applies only to

the universal church seems to run contrary to logic, the biblical teaching
REGENERATE CHURCH MEMBERSHIP 95

on church discipline, and the way local churches are described and gath­

ered in the New Testament.

Others object to regenerate church membership on the grounds

that the New Testament reflects a pioneering evangelistic situation. The

accounts in the book of Acts record the apostles preaching to adults, and

certainly no adult should be baptized and granted church membership

apart from regeneration. However, as the church grew, the regenerate

individuals composing the church had children. The children of believing

parents, they claim, have a special connection with the church because of

their parents, and should thus be baptized and brought into the fellowship
5
of the church, even prior to personal faith.

Those who advocate regenerate church membership acknowledge that

the children of believing parents have a great blessing and many advantages,

but they would note that the children of believing parents must still trust

Christ personally to be saved, and that until they are saved, they are not

proper subjects of baptism, for baptism in the New Testament is baptism of

believers only. And since Baptists agree with most other Christian denomi­

nations that baptism is the proper ceremonial rite of initiation into church

membership, they object both to baptizing infants and to including them

6
among the church's membership, for both are appropriate only for believers.

Furthermore, the early church did not move to the adoption of infant

baptism and a corresponding adoption of infant membership in local

churches as soon as their founding members had children. Most scholars

agree that the practice of infant baptism did not appear until the latter half

of the second century and did not become widespread or standard until

the late third or even fourth century. The issue was still being debated as

late as Augustine, but his support and rationale for it became decisive.

Infant baptism and acceptance of the church as the mixed body composed

of saved and unsaved became standard for the next thousand years.

5. This is one of the classic arguments of those who baptize infants, going back at least as far as

Calvin. See John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 21:1346-47 (4.16. 23-24).

6. In his classic work on Anabaptism, Franklin Littell says that baptism became important to

Anabaptists because it was "the most obvious dividing line between two patterns of church

organization:' See Franklin Littell, The Anabaptist View of the Church: A Study in the Origins of

Sectarian Protestantism, 2d ed. (Boston: Starr King Press, 1958), xv. Leon McBeth sees a similar

development in Baptist life. He says the origin of Baptists is best seen"as a search for a pure

church;' composed of what they called "visible saints:' It was that search that led them to adopt

believer's baptism. See Leon McBeth, The Baptist Heritage (Nashville: Broadman, 1987), 75. I

would add that for both the Anabaptists and Baptists, their commitment to Scripture alone was

also crucial for their adoption of believer's baptism.

96 CHAPTER4

A final objection that could be raised against the idea of regenerate

church membership comes from history. We have argued that history

can be a useful tool in checking our interpretation of Scripture with

those of other times, lest our interpretation be unduly influenced by

contemporary cultural forces and assumptions. Some might argue that

the fact that the church as a whole, for the bulk of its history, accepted

the idea of the church as a mixed body of believers and nonbelievers

should call into question the interpretation of Scripture held by those in

the believers' church camp. For more than a thousand years, some could

argue, the idea of the mixed church had not been seen as incompatible

with Scripture by some of the most able interpreters in all of church

history. If the doctrine of regenerate church membership is as obvious

in Scripture as claimed in this chapter, why did so many notable students

of the Bible miss it? Why was it absent for more than a thousand years of

Christian history? While these are valid questions, there are three cogent

answers to this objection.

First, while it is true that the mixed church interpretation had been

accepted for more than a thousand years by the time of the Reformation, it

was not true of the first four hundred years of the church's history. During

that time, the story was much more mixed. As mentioned above, infant

baptism did not begin until the late second century, and with it there was a

challenge to the believers' only church. But infant baptism was not imme­

diately or universally accepted. There are also records indicating the seri­
7
ous preparation new believers underwent prior to baptism and the recur­

ring waves of persecution tended to act as a purifying agent for the church,

scaring off those who were not genuinely committed to Christ. The very

vehemence with which Augustine argues for the mixed church shows that

it was not yet fully or universally accepted in his day.

Second, the long period in which the believers' church interpreta­

tion was not adopted coincides with that of relative biblical ignorance.

Once the Bible became readily available, the believers' church interpreta­

tion was renewed almost immediately. Even Luther, in one of his early

writings, contemplated the possibility of a church for those who wanted

to be "Christians in earnest;' but did not pursue it, saying he lacked the

7. The very term catechism is derived from the oral instruction given to baptismal candidates prior

to baptism in the early church, often over a period of months. It shows the concern of the early

church to baptize only those who could make a credible profession of faith.
REGENERATE CHURCH MEMBERSHIP 97

8
people ready for it. But others, the Anabaptists and, later, the Baptists

found thousands of people ready for it, people persuaded by Scripture that

the church should be composed of believers only, people who formed such

churches in the face of severe persecution. The English Baptist historian

J. H. Shakespeare noted that the availability of the Bible is an important

yet often underrated factor in the origin of the Baptists as a pure church of
9
believers only. Once the Bible was opened to people, they soon found the

believers' church within its teachings.

Finally, the believers' church has proven itself to be more than a

passing fad in biblical interpretation but one that has grown more and

more prevalent over the past five hundred years. History rightly guards

us against novel interpretations of the Bible, but the believers' church is

no longer a novel interpretation. For those who value fidelity to Scripture

above tradition, the biblical support for a regenerate church of believers

only is so strong and obvious that we wonder how the church could have

missed it for so long. The answer to that question lies in a confluence of

historical circumstances that powerfully shaped beliefs about a number

of issues that in turn led to an acceptance of the church as a mixed body.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CORPUS PERMIXTUM

This leads to the second stage of our investigation. How, in view of the

strong biblical support for the believers' church, did the opposing idea of

the church as a corpus permixtum, or mixed body composed of believers

and nonbelievers, become so widely accepted?

A key event noted by many in the believers' church tradition is the

10
conversion of the Roman emperor Constantine in 3 1 2 . Prior to the battle

of Milvian Bridge with Maxentius, Constantine supposedly received a

vision that he saw as divine aid from the Christian God. The genuineness of

his conversion is still debated by historians; the genuineness of the change in

8. See Martin Luther, "The German Mass and Order of Service, Martin Luther's Preface;' in Luther's

Works, eds. Jaroslav Pelikan, H. T. Lehmann et al., vol. 53, ed. Ulrich Leupold (Philadelphia:

Fortress Press, 1965), 53:63-64.

9. J. H. Shakespeare, Baptist and Congregational Pioneers (London: Kingsgate Press, 1906), 2-4.

10. John Howard Yoder describes the fall of the church as the "fusion of church and society of

which Constantine was the architect, Eusebius the priest, Augustine the apologete, and the

Crusades and Inquisition the culmination:' See John Yoder, "A People in the World: Theological

Interpretation;' in The Concept of the Believers' Church, 272. Donald Durnbaugh, The Believers'

Church, 2 1 2 - 1 5 , sees this idea of the fall of the church with Constantine as one of the defining

characteristics of the believers' church tradition.

98 CHAPTER4

the Roman Empire cannot be doubted. Rodney Stark says, "For far too long,

historians have accepted the claim that the conversion of Emperor Constan­

tine . . . caused the triumph of Christianity. To the contrary, he destroyed

its most attractive and dynamic aspects?" In 3 1 3 the Edict of Milan made

Christianity a legal religion, and over the course of the next century, Chris­

tianity became the dominant religion. At the time of Constantine's conver­

sion, Christians in the Roman Empire comprised about 10 percent of the

12
population; within a century, that number jumped to 90 percent. Before

Constantine, persecution tended to keep membership in the church limited

to those who were genuinely believers, and the line between the church and

state was clear. After Constantine, the church became the recipient of impe­

rial funds and favor rather than persecution. As a result, membership in the

church became a mark of social acceptability, and there was a virtual stam­

pede of candidates for the priesthood." This growing friendliness between

church and state led to the eventual union of the two.

Even as the Roman Empire began to break down, the pattern begun

by Constantine continued. For example, in 496, Clovis, king of the Franks,

agreed to accept Christ, as his Christian wife Clotilde wanted, if God gave

him victory over his enemies. Victory came, and Clovis was baptized

along with three thousand of his still-pagan soldiers. It is hard to see their

baptism as the baptism of believers or the church to which they belonged

as a church of genuine believers. This pattern of "conversion" became

common in the spread of Christianity across Europe. Historian Stephen

Neill describes the process:

The record in place after place tends to be much the same. The first bishop

was martyred by the savage tribes; his blood then appropriately forms the

seed of the church. Initial successes are followed by pagan reactions, but

the church comes in again under the aegis of a deeply converted ruler. The

initial Christianization is inevitably very superficial, but this is in each case

followed by a long period of building, in which the faith becomes part of the

14
inheritance of the people.

11. Rodney Stark, For the Glory of God: How Monotheism Led to Reformations, Science, Witch-Hunts,

and the End of Slavery (Princeton, NJ/Oxford, UK: Princeton University Press, 2003), 33.

12. Robert G. Clouse, Richard V. Pierard, and Edwin M. Yamauchi, Two Kingdoms: The Church and

Culture through the Ages (Chicago: Moody, 1993), 109.

13. Stark, For the Glory of God, 33.

14. Stephen Neill, A History of Christian Missions (Baltimore, MD: Penguin Books, 1964), 90.
REGENERATE CHURCH MEMBERSHIP 99

Of course, the churches produced under these circumstances were

quite different from those we see in the New Testament. In fact, Stark

notes how frequently the church incorporated various popular pagan

practices: "the Church made it easy to become a Christian-so easy that

actual conversion seldom occurred?"

Was there no protest to this decline in commitment? Early on there were

the Donatists, whose protest called forth the definitive defense of the church

as a mixed body by Augustine. The Donatists wanted a church of genuinely

holy people, and were disturbed by the ease with which the church received

back into its midst priests and bishops who had denied Christ under perse­

cution or handed over copies of the Scriptures. They separated from the

Catholic Church in North Africa, seeing themselves as the preservers of the

true and holy church. Augustine argued that the holiness of the church is not

a present observable holiness found in the lives of the individual members,

but a holiness the church has by virtue of its connection with Christ and

the Spirit. He highlighted a parable of Jesus that became often used over the

centuries, that of the wheat and tares. In this present age, the wheat and tares

grow together; only at the harvest time are they separated. In the same way,

the church today consists of believers and nonbelievers. God will separate

them only at the final judgment. Of course, the problem with this analogy

is that in the parable (Matt. 13:24-30), the field in which the wheat and

tares grow is the world, not the church. But Augustine's influence prevailed,

and the accepted view of the church became that of the mixed body (corpus
16
permixtum) of believers and nonbelievers.

Infant baptism became the norm for those in areas where the church

was established; large-scale baptisms incorporated whole tribes into the

church in pioneer areas. Baptism was seen as effecting the forgiveness of

original sin, regardless of whether the individual baptized had genuine

faith or not. The idea of limiting membership in the church to believers

only was effectively lost.

Augustine also furthered the union of church and state by appeal­

ing to the state for help against the Donatists. He saw their separation

from the one true and established church as a sin against the unity of the

church, a sin so serious that they should be compelled to reunite with

Mother church. He took as his proof text Luke 1 4 : 2 3 : "compel them to

15. Stark, For the Glory of God, 40.

16. For more on this issue, see Willis, Saint Augustine and the Donatist Controversy.
100 CHAPTER4

c o m e in:' Since religious unity was seen as an aid to political unity and

stability, states were eager to act to compel religious unity. Luke 1 4 : 2 3 gave
17
them biblical justification.

Throughout the Middle Ages, the church remained a mixed and often

immoral body. Those who desired a purer fellowship usually found their

way into one of the monastic orders that developed, at least in part in reac­
18
tion to the declining level of commitment in the church.

On the eve of the Reformation, Europe could be seen as basically reli­

giously unified in the corpus christianum, the one body of Christ. But that

unity was to be shattered by the Reformation. Yet, in the case of Luther,

Zwingli, and Calvin, there was no change in the fundamental idea of

the church. Indeed, all three are called magisterial Reformers, because

all three saw a role for the magistrate, or state, in supporting the church.

Though Luther in theory wanted to separate church and state, and at times

espoused ideas that would seem to lead to a gathered church of believers

only, he never followed these ideas to their logical conclusions. In prac­

tice he allowed the godly prince to support and establish the true church

and embraced the inclusive or territorial church, where all the members

of society were members of the church. Zwingli was emphatic that every

member of the state must be baptized and thus become a member of the

church, accepting the mixed nature of the church as wheat and tares. And

though Calvin clashed with the magistrates in Geneva over a number of

issues, he never denied that it was both the right and duty of the magis­

trates to maintain religious uniformity, nor did he ever disavow the idea of

the church as a mixed body.

But in Zwingli's Zurich, some emerged with more radical ideas.

Though the flashpoint was the baptism of believers only, the fundamen­

tal battle was over the nature of the church. People like Conrad Grebel,

George Blaurock, and Felix Mantz began to argue for a church of believ­

ers only. They had been taught by their pastor, Ulrich Zwingli, that they

should derive their doctrine from Scripture alone. They saw Scripture as

teaching a church of believers only and baptism for believers only. The

response to their ideas was violent persecution from Catholics, Lutherans,

Zwinglians, and Calvinists alike.

17. Clouse, Pierard, and Yamauchi, Two Kingdoms, 82.

18. Stark, For the Glory of God, 40, calls the official church that developed after Constantine the

Church of Power, a mixed body whose leaders were often blatantly immoral. As a reaction to the

Church of Power, the Church of Piety arose, mainly in the monastic movement.
REGENERATE CHURCH MEMBERSHIP 101

What was so dangerous in the Anabaptist view that it called forth

such a violent response? The Catholics and magisterial Reformers both

assumed without question that a political entity could not remain politi­

cally unified without religious uniformity. The church and the state were

coterminous; that is, they shared the same membership. And the wars

of religion that swept Europe in the wake of the Reformation seemed to

support their belief. The 1 5 5 5 Peace of Augsburg was only able to stop

these religiously based wars by mandating that the religion of an area

would be that of its prince or ruler ( under the formula cuius regio, eius

religio, which is roughly translated, "whose the region, his the religion'').

The idea that there could be multiple churches in a state seemed to them

to be a route to anarchy. Luther in particular feared that the Anabaptist

view would lead to anarchy and political unrest which would hinder the

Reformation and the spread of the gospel. As Paul Avis puts it, the magis­

terial Reformers were more concerned with redefining the center of the

church ( Christ and the gospel); the Anabaptists emphasized the impor­
19
tance of defining the circumference of the church (believers only). But

defining the circumference meant separating the church from the world.

This Anabaptist idea was not just seen as bad theology but as political trea­

son that would lead to chaos in countries they influenced and ultimately

hinder the spread of the gospel. Thus the Anabaptists suffered horrible

persecution, but the idea of the church as a gathered body of believers

would not die. It reemerged with the origin of Baptists.

REGENERATE CHURCH MEMBERSHIP

AND BAPTIST ECCLESIOLOGY

While Anabaptists may have exercised some influence in the origin of

Baptists, the clearest seed bed for modern Baptists is seen in English Sepa­

ratism. Separatism developed in the wake of the Elizabethan Settlement

of 1 5 5 8 , which gave the church in England basically the doctrine of the

magisterial Reformers but much of the ceremony and external trappings

of Catholicism. The Puritans were dissatisfied with what they regarded

as these halfway measures and sought to further purify the church. But

eventually some of these Puritans began to realize that there would be no

radical reform under Elizabeth and concluded that they could no longer

remain in the Church of England, as it was a hopelessly corrupted and

19. Paul D. L. Avis, The Church in the Theology of the Reformers (Atlanta: John Knox, 1 9 8 1 ) , 54-55.
102 CHAPTER4

compromised church. They became Separatists, meeting in congregations

or what were called conventicles, separated from the state church, despite

the fact that such meetings were illegal. Early Baptists emerged in two

forms from two of these Separatist conventicles, and inherited from them

their concern for a pure church. In this section, we trace the role reg en -

erate church membership played in the origin of Baptists and show its

centrality in Baptist thinking about the church.

Regenerate Church Membership and Baptist Origins

John Smyth ( c. 1 5 7 0 - 1 6 1 2 ) was ordained an Anglican priest, but he

became dissatisfied with the Anglican Church and became a Puritan and

20
then a Separatist minister. He and Thomas Helwys were members of a

Separatist congregation in Gainsborough, London, that fled to Holland in

1 6 0 7 to avoid the persecution of the English government. By 1609, Smyth

had come to three important conclusions. First, since he, as a Separat­

ist, had concluded that the Church of England was hopelessly corrupt

and a false church, he had to further conclude that his baptism from the

Church of England was a false baptism. Second, as he studied the New

Testament, he concluded that it taught the baptism of believers alone.

Third, and perhaps most fundamentally, he concluded that the church

should be based on the baptism of professed believers. Such a practice

was in accord with Scripture and would produce a pure church. Led by

Smyth, his Separatist congregation formally dissolved as a church. He

first baptized himself, pouring water over his own head. He then baptized

Helwys and about forty others, reconstituting the church on the basis of

believer's baptism and a church covenant.

Within a short time, Smyth began to think perhaps he had been hasty

in baptizing himself. He tried to persuade the church members to repu­

diate their baptism at his hands and he himself applied to a Mennonite

church for baptism. But Helwys and a number of church members did

not share Smyths concerns. They reluctantly parted ways and decided to

return to England, despite the persecution they would face. They estab­

lished the first Baptist church on English soil in 1 6 1 1 , beginning the line of

the General Baptist churches, so called because they believed in a general,

20. For a thorough study of Smyth's life and thought, see Jason K. Lee, The Theology of John Smyth:

Puritan, Separatist, Baptist, Mennonite (Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 2003).
REGENERATE CHURCH MEMBERSHIP 103

21
as opposed to a particular, atonement. Over the next few decades dozens

of General Baptist churches developed across England. A consistent theme

in their writings, especially in their confessions of faith, is their belief in

regenerate church membership.

Another line of Baptists emerged from a second Separatist conventicle

in England. This group is known to historians as the JLJ church, named

after the last names of its first three pastors (Henry Jacob, John Lath­

rop, and Henry Jessey). Around 1630, controversy began to arise in this

church over the issue of infant baptism. Some withdrew as early as 1 6 3 3 ,

but records are inconclusive as to whether they left because they opposed

the baptism of infants or whether their opposition was to any baptism

performed by the Church of England. By 1 6 3 8 , records are clear that at

least six more members withdrew upon their conviction that baptism was

for believers alone. These believers held to Calvinist theology and began

the line of Particular Baptists.

Despite the emphasis on baptism, the deeper, more fundamen­

tal issue for both the General and Particular Baptists concerned those

who should compose the church. Leon McBeth says that these early

Baptists "sought a church composed of 'visible saints; that is, true believ­

ers, observing the gospel ordinances and obeying the commands of

Christ.?" Purity had been the motive of the Puritans; the Separatists and

Baptists took the search for purity further. For Baptists, a pure church

had to be composed of believers alone. True believers would obviously

want to obey Christ's command and rightly observe the ordinances,

and Baptists saw believer's baptism as the only proper way to practice

baptism. Further, baptism was the event in which one gave testimony to

faith and repentance. If believer's baptism was made the prerequisite to

church membership, then regenerate membership would be preserved.

Believer's baptism protected regenerate church membership. We see this

principle consistently reflected in Baptist thinking about the church. We

look first at their confessions of faith.

21. By the early seventeenth century, Calvinist theologians had articulated the view that Christ's

death was designed to accomplish atonement for a particular, limited group, the elect. This

was known as particular or limited atonement. The opposing view, which was being advocated

by James Arminius at the very time Smyth and Helwys went to Holland, claimed that Christ

died for all in general. This view was called general atonement. Smyth was trained in Calvinist

theology, but apparently he and Helwys adopted Arminian views while in Holland.

22. McBeth, The Baptist Heritage, 75.

104 CHAPTER4

Regenerate Church Membership in Baptist Confessions of Faith

While still in Holland, Helwys wrote a confession of faith for his

church, regarded as the first English Baptist confession of faith. Here is

how that confession treats church membership:

everie Church is to receive in all their members by Baptisme upon the

Confession off their faith and sinnes wrought by the preaching off the

Gospel, according to the primitive Institucion. Mat. 2 8 . 1 9 . And practice,

Acts 2 . 4 1 . And therefore Churches constituted after anie other manner, or

23
off anie other persons are not according to CHRIST'S Testament.

Charles W Deweese states that this first confession set the standard for

virtually all succeeding Baptist confessions as far as the idea of church member­

ship. The elements of confession of sin, profession of faith, and covenant

commitment to the church through believer's baptism "characterize descrip­

tions of the church found in practically all Baptist confessions of faith'?'

As General Baptists spread in England, they formed associations. By

1 6 5 1 , thirty General Baptist churches in the Midlands region of England

had formed an association. They produced a confession called "The Faith

and Practice of Thirty Congregations, Gathered According to the Primi­

tive Pattern:' It shows the developing consensus among these early Baptists

concerning who should compose a properly ordered church: "those which

received the word of God preached by the Ministries of the Gospel, and

were Baptized according to the Counsel of God, at the same time or day

they were of the visible Church of God, Acts 2 . 4 1 : '

In 1660, forty General Baptist church leaders met in London and drew

up a confession of faith that was reaffirmed by the General Assembly of

General Baptists in 1663, when it began to be called the Standard Confes­

sion. It gives the same, characteristically Baptist view of church membership:

the right and only way, of gathering Churches, ( according to Christs appoint­

ment, Mat. 28. 19, 20.) is first to teach, or preach the Gospel, Mark 1 6 . 1 6 .

to the Sons and Daughters of men; and then to Baptise ( that is in English to

23. Lumpkin, Baptist Confessions of Faith, 120. Lumpkin preserves the archaic spelling and form

of the original. All citations from Baptist confessions are from Lumpkins collection, unless

otherwise noted.

24. Charles W Deweese, A Community of Believers: Making Church Membership More Meaningful

(Valley Forge, PA: Judson Press, 1978), 12.

REGENERATE CHURCH MEMBERSHIP 105

Dip) in the name of the Father, Son, and holy Spirit, or in the name of the

Lord Jesus Christ; such only of them, as profess repentance towards God, and

faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ, Acts 2 . 3 8 . Acts 8 : 1 2 .

One final example from early English General Baptists comes from

the work produced in 1678, and signed by fifty-four representatives

from General Baptist churches in the Midlands area of England. This

document, called the Orthodox Creed, was part of an effort to show the

Anglicans that the various dissenting groups (Baptists, Presbyterians,

and Congregationalists) were all sound and in agreement on the funda­

mental doctrines of the faith. Nevertheless, on the issue of the proper

subjects for church membership, it preserves the Baptist perspective:

"none ought to be admitted into the visible church of Christ, without

being first baptized; and those which do really profess repentance toward

God, and faith in, and obedience to our Lord Jesus Christ, are the only

proper subjects of this ordinance, according to our Lord's holy institu­

tion, and primitive practice:'

In all these examples, we see the concern to preserve regenerate

church membership; believer's baptism is important because it is the prin­

cipal means by which such membership is preserved. Baptism is seen as

the act by which one is admitted into church membership, and baptism is

limited to those who are regenerate (i.e., those who profess repentance and

faith). The centrality of baptism, in both the denominational name and in

confessions, stems from the Baptist conviction that the Bible teaches the

baptism of believers only and the use of baptism as the means by which

regenerate church membership is preserved.

Particular Baptist confessions reveal the same story. In 1644, seven

Particular Baptist churches in London produced what came to be one of

the most important Baptist statements of all time. William Lumpkin says

of the London Confession of 1644, "Perhaps no Confession of Faith has

had so formative an influence on Baptist life as this one.?" Its description

of the church clearly describes a church of regenerate members:

Christ hath here on earth a spirituall Kingdome, which is the Church,

which he hath purchased and redeemed to himselfe, as a peculiar inheri­

tance: which Church, as it is visible to us, is a company of visible Saints,

25. Lumpkin, Baptist Confessions of Faith, 152.

106 CHAPTER4

called and separated from the world, by the word and Spirit of God, to

the visible profession of the faith of the Gospel, being baptized into that

faith, and joyned to the Lord, and each other, by mutuall agreement, in

the practical injoyment of the Ordinances, commanded by Christ their

head and King.

Since this confession was so formative, we may note briefly several

ideas and phrases in this article that are particularly descriptive of the

Baptist view of the church. There is an emphasis on visibility. The church

referred to here is not the invisible church, but local, visible bodies. The

lifestyle of the members of these churches is one of visible godliness.

They live as believers ought to live. Baptism is the visible act in which one

professes faith. Entering the church involves being joined to the Lord and

to the other members in a covenant arrangement. Thus, to be a member

of a Baptist church, one, first of all, has to be a genuine Christian, living as

a Christian ought to live. Next, there has to be visible profession of faith

in believer's baptism. Then, finally, the prospective member is expected

to enter into covenant with the church. The Somerset Confession of 1 6 5 6

goes even further in emphasizing what William Lumpkin calls a "distinc­

tively Baptist" principle: the duty of the church and its leaders to receive
26
into its membership only those who give evidence of regeneration. Note

the tone of urgency and importance in this statement: "in admitting of

members into the church of Christ, it is the duty of the church, and minis­

ters whom it concerns, in faithfulness to God, that they be careful they

receive none but such as do make forth evident demonstration of the new

birth, and the work of faith with power:'

Two more confessions demand brief mention. The Second London

Confession, published initially in 1677, was adopted by Philadelphia

Baptists as their confession by 1 7 42, was renamed the Philadelphia

Confession, and remained the most influential confession among Baptists

in the New World for close to a century. Concerning the church, it states:

<�11 persons throughout the world, professing the faith of the gospel, and

obedience unto God by Christ, according unto it; not destroying their

own profession by any errors everting the foundation, or unholyness of

conversation, are and may be called visible Saints; and of such ought all

particular Congregations to be constituted:'

26. Ibid., 202.

REGENERATE CHURCH MEMBERSHIP 107

Finally, the New Hampshire Confession of 1 8 3 3 should be noted

because it eventually supplanted the Philadelphia Confession in terms of

its importance to Baptists in America. Its statement on the church, with

only minor changes, was adopted by Southern Baptists in The Baptist

Faith and Message of 1 9 2 5 , and was essentially retained in the 1 9 6 3 and

2000 revisions. Here is the central statement of the 1 8 3 3 New Hampshire

Confession on the church: "a visible church of Christ is a congregation of

baptized believers, associated by covenant in the faith and fellowship of

the Gospel:' Three requirements for church membership are implied in

these brief words. Candidates must be Christians, they must have received

believer's baptism, and they must enter into covenant with the church.

These confessions were not just empty words. A fascinating example of

how the confessions were applied is seen in the 1 7 7 3 Summary of Church

27
Discipline of the Charleston Baptist Association. The Baptist Church in

Charleston, South Carolina, was the first Baptist church in the South, and

was to become widely influential. The Charleston Association was the

second Baptist association formed in the New World, and developed this

document to guide the practice of Baptist churches in their association

and across the South. Chapter 3 is devoted to giving explicit instructions

28
on how to receive persons into church membership. It says, "They must

be truly gracious persons;' meaning that they must have experienced "an

entire change of nature:' It states that they "should be persons of some

competent knowledge of divine and spiritual things;' listing as examples

some items that would stump many contemporary pastors. Then they

must be examined as to their conduct by the congregation. If it is found

that "their practice contradicts their profession they are not to be admitted

into church membership:' Next, they must receive believer's baptism: "It is

allowed by all that baptism is essential to church communion and ought

to precede if' The church then votes on the one applying for member­

ship, but only after a period of examination to allow church members to

become satisfied that the candidate does meet all the requirements. When

the church does vote its approval, the candidate is to be acquainted "with

the rules and orders of God's house:' Only then, as the candidate enters

27. This document is reprinted in James Leo Garrett Jr., Baptist Church Discipline (Nashville:

Broadman, 1962), 27-52; and Mark Dever, ed., Polity: Biblical Arguments on How to Conduct

Church Life (Washington, DC: Center for Church Reform, 2 0 0 1 ) , 1 1 3 - 3 3 .

28. The quotations in this paragraph are taken from chapter 3 of the document found in Garrett,

Baptist Church Discipline, 34-39, or Dever, Polity, 1 2 2 - 2 5 .

108 CHAPTER4

into covenant with the church, does she or he become a member in union

and communion with that church.

In the nineteenth century, discussions of the necessity of believer's

baptism by immersion, closed communion, church discipline, and the

duties of church membership were common among Baptists and seen as

29
their identifying characteristic concerns. Popular Baptist writer James

M. Pendleton, in a work that went through many printings, listed four

reasons why he was a Baptist: the Baptist insistence on believer's baptism,

the Baptist acceptance of immersion as the biblically mandated form of

baptism, the Baptist adherence to congregational church government,

and the Baptist observance of the Lord's Supper as a memorial for local

30
church members only. Baptist historians Anthony Chute, Nathan Finn,

and Michael Haykin note that "[ejvery major Baptist confession of faith

up to the present day affirms regenerate church membership;' which they

say is recognized by most Baptist scholars as "the foundational Baptist

distinctive,"?'

Clearly the vision of the church here is vastly different from the

corpus permixtum of Augustine and the medieval church, or the territorial

churches of the magisterial Reformers. It is a distinctively Baptist vision.

Central to that vision is an insistence on regenerate church membership.

It is either presupposed by or is prerequisite to a number of important

aspects of Baptist ecclesiology.

Regenerate Church Membership as the Center of Baptist Ecclesiology

By this point, the reader may be wondering why we have dealt with

this issue in so much detail. There are at least three reasons. One is a bibli­

cal reason. Regenerate church membership is clearly taught in Scripture.

That point needs emphasis because this teaching was absent from church

doctrine and practice for more than a thousand years. A second reason is

historical. Regenerate church membership was the root issue behind the

origin of Baptists and has been a historic distinctive of Baptists. That fact

29. See The Baptist Manual (Philadelphia: American Baptist Publication Society, 1848). The volume is

subtitled: "A Selection from the Series of Publications of the American Baptist Publication Society,

Designed for the Use of Families; and as an Exposition of the Distinguishing Sentiments of the

Denomination:' Most of the articles deal with issues related to regenerate church membership.

30. Pendleton, Three Reasons Why I Am a Baptist, with a Fourth Reason Added on Communion. This

was an extremely popular book and reflects widely held Baptist views.

31. Anthony L. Chute, Nathan A. Finn, and Michael A.G. Haykin, The Baptist Story: From English

Sect to Global Movement (Nashville: B & H Academic, 2015), 3 3 1 .

REGENERATE CHURCH MEMBERSHIP 109

needs to be recognized and remembered. A third reason is theological.

As Justice Anderson said, regenerate church membership is the "cardi­

nal point of Baptist ecclesiology, and logically, the point of departure for

church polity?" Charles W. Deweese argues that the importance of regen­

erate church membership is even more far-reaching: "A direct relationship

exists between a regenerate church membership and five other areas of

Baptist life-church covenants, the ordinances, church discipline, evange­

lism, and small groups.?' The following is an attempt to show the connec­

tion between regenerate church membership and several key Baptist

beliefs about the church.

Regenerate Church Membership and Believer's Baptism

First, regenerate church membership is integrally related to the practice

that gives Baptists their name, believer's baptism. Baptist theologian Stanley

Grenz sees believer's baptism as the "logical outworking" of the principle of

regenerate church membership. He sees initiation into the people of God

as a three-step process: "This process begins with personal faith in Christ

as Savior and Lord, is publicly expressed in water baptism, and culminates

in formal church membership.?" Following this process produces a church

that matches the phrase often used to describe the church in Baptist confes­

sions of faith, "a congregation of baptized believers:'

A. H. Strong sees a similar link between regenerate church member­

ship and believer's baptism: "Regeneration and baptism, although not

holding to each other the relation of effect and cause, are both regarded in

the New Testament as essential to the restoration of man's right relations

to God and to his people. They properly constitute parts of one whole, and

are not to be unnecessarily separated.t" On the other hand, infant baptism,

Strong argues, undermines and eventually destroys regenerate church

36
membership. Those baptized as infants are brought within the member­

ship of the church, regardless of whether or not they have experienced

regeneration. Over time, nonregenerate membership becomes common.

Believer's baptism safeguards regenerate church membership. If baptism

is limited to believers only, and if church membership is limited to those

32. Anderson, "Old Baptist Principles Reset.B.

33. Deweese, A Community of Believers, 13.

34. Grenz, Theology for the Community of God, 7 1 1 - 1 2 .

35. A . H . Strong, Systematic Theology (Philadelphia: Judson Press, 1907), 950. 35 ..

36. Ibid., 958.

110 CHAPTER4

baptized, the church will have only believers (i.e., regenerate people) in

its membership. These two requirements-baptism for believers only and

baptism for church membership-link baptism and regenerate church

membership. This link is recognized in Baptist confessions of faith, which,

according to Charles W Deweese, are "at one in stressing the centrality of

believer's baptism in creating a regenerate church membership.?"

Some Baptists today are questioning the validity of requiring believ­

er's baptism for church membership. They think infant baptism is not

taught in Scripture but do not think an improper baptism is a sufficient

reason to deny church membership to someone who meets all the other
38
qualifications for membership. In my own experience as a pastor, I faced

this issue with a couple who wanted to join our church but came from a

Presbyterian background. Both were obviously committed Christians, but

the husband saw no problem with his infant baptism, and didn't think

he ought to be required to be baptized again. Some Baptists, particularly

in Great Britain, have agreed with this man's position and adopted open

membership, in which any believer is accepted as a member, baptized

or not. But most Baptists have felt biblical teaching clearly indicates that

baptism is for believers only, and that while not necessary for salvation,

baptism is an important step of obedience that should not be dismissed in

such a cavalier fashion. Mark Dever says,

Baptism, then, is essential for membership in a church because if one were to be

admitted by a church, only to refuse such a clear command of Christ, then such

an unbaptized person claiming to follow Christ would simply be immediately

disciplined until they either decided to follow Christ's commands, or stopped

having the church's endorsement of their claim to follow Him. There will never

39
be anything that Jesus calls you to do that will be easier than baptism.

Baptism is the appointed and commanded means for proclaiming

publicly that one is a new creature in Christ. Requiring it for church

membership thus safeguards regenerate church membership, which is

37. Deweese, A Community of Believers, 13.

38. This is the position taken by John R. Tyler, Baptism: We've Got It Right . . . and Wrong (Macon,

GA: Smyth & Helwys, 2003) and by several of the contributors to Proclaiming the Baptist Vision:

Baptism and the Lord's Supper, ed. Walter B. Shurden (Macon, GA: Smyth & Helwys, 1999).

39. Mark Dever, A Display of God's Glory: Basics of Church Structure, 2nd ed. (Washington, DC:

Center for Church Reform/9 Marks Ministries, 2001), 52-53.

REGENERATE CHURCH MEMBERSHIP I l l

not a minor but a major issue for Baptists. In the pastoral situation I

mentioned above, we went over the biblical teaching with the man in

question, and he eventually agreed that baptism is for believers, was

baptized, and joined our church. Whether baptism, as practiced by

Baptists in North America today, still serves as an effective safeguard to

regenerate church membership is a different question, one that we will

examine shortly.

Regenerate Church Membership and Congregational Church Government

A second area in which regenerate church membership has been

foundational to Baptist ecclesiology has been in congregational govern­

ment. Virtually all Baptist defenses of congregationalism make use of

the doctrine of the priesthood of all believers. For example, Millard

Erickson says congregational church government is preferable because

it "takes seriously the principle of the priesthood and spiritual compe­

tency of all believers" as well as "the promise that the indwelling Spirit

will guide all believers."? Stanley Grenz also asserts that the priesthood

of all believers leads to the view that it is the responsibility of "the entire

company of believers [to] discern Christ's will for his people,":" The

assumption is that, since all the members of the church are regenerate

believer-priests, and thus indwelt by the Spirit, they all have both the

ability and the responsibility to hear God's voice and discern God's will

for the body. But this rests on the assumption that the church will be

composed of those who are regenerate, and thus able to receive Christ's

guidance. As J. L. Reynolds noted in 1849, congregational govern­

ment requires what he called "a Bible constituency:' He explained: "If

churches are composed only of such as give credible evidence of having

been taught by the Spirit of God, they may be safely entrusted with the

management of their own interests,"?

Early Baptists added a further element in their articulation of the basis

of congregational polity. It was not just that individual believers, because

regenerate and thus indwelt by the Spirit, could be trusted to participate

in church government; they also believed Christ had given a special gift of

40. Erickson, Christian Theology, 1005.

41. Grenz, Theology for the Community of God, 723-24.

42. J. L. Reynolds, "Church Polity or the Kingdom of Christ, in Its Internal and External

Development;' reprinted in Dever, ed., Polity, 345.

1 1 2 CHAPTER4

what they called "church power" to the corporate body gathered according

to his instructions, that is, to churches composed of regenerate members.

The First London Confession says every church gathered as a company

of visible saints "has power given them from Christ for their better well­

being:' The Orthodox Creed of 1679 spells out how that power given by

Christ to the church is also the basis for the authority exercised by leaders

of the church: "We believe that the great king, and lawgiver, Christ, the

universal and only head of his church, hath given to his visible church, a

subordinate power, or authority, for the well-being, ordering, and govern­

ing of it . . . the executive part of which derivative power of discipline and

government, is committed to his ministers:' Thus the supreme authority

over the church is Christ; he gives the church a "subordinate power" that is

the basis for congregational government; the church delegates the "execu­

tive part" of that power to its leaders.

Perhaps the fullest statement of the doctrine of church competence

comes from the extremely influential Second London Confession. It states,

"To each of these Churches thus gathered, according to his mind, declared

in his word, he [Christ] hath given all that power and authority, which is

in any way needful, for their carrying on that order in worship, and disci­

pline, which he hath instituted for them to observe; with commands, and

rules for the due and right exerting, and executing of that power:'

Congregational church government is founded upon and presupposes

a regenerate church membership, because only regenerate members are

competent to govern themselves. In recent years there has been a small but

perceptible movement among some Baptists toward adopting elder rule,

fueled, at least in part, by the difficulties experienced by pastors in deal­

ing with unfit congregations. But the problem is not with congregational­

ism as a system of church government, but with particular congregations

no longer composed exclusively of regenerate members. Congregational

church government demands regenerate church membership.

Regenerate Church Membership and the Lord's Supper

Regenerate church membership is also related to the Baptist practice

of the ordinance of the Lord's Supper, or communion. We will discuss the

meaning of this rite in more detail in chapter 1 1 ; the issue at this point is

who may properly participate in it.

Baptists along with all the major traditions have believed that partici­

pation in the Lord's Supper should be limited to believers, those profess-

REGENERATE CHURCH MEMBERSHIP 1 1 3

ing faith in Christ. There have been a few individuals in church history

who have argued for the Lord's Supper as a "converting ordinance" which

43
should therefore be open to the nonconverted, and even today there

are a few churches who offer the Lord's Supper to anyone who desires to

partake, leaving the decision up to the individual's conscience. In such

situations, the result is "believers and unbelievers alike participating.?"

But this is very uncommon in Baptist life. A 2 0 1 2 survey of Southern

Baptist churches found that only five percent offer the Lord's Supper to

"anyone who wants to participate.":"

The reasons for limiting the Lord's Supper to believers are not difficult

to see. How can one eat the bread and drink the cup in remembrance of

one they have yet to come to know ( 1 Cor. 1 1 : 2 4 - 2 5 ) , or how can those not

part of the one body properly share in the one loaf ( 1 Cor. 1 0 : 1 6 - 1 7 ) ? This

limitation of the Lord's Supper to professing believers is widely accepted

among virtually all Christian groups. Historically, this has been known as

open communion: open to all professing believers.

But Baptist practice of the Lord's Supper has historically gone beyond

just the limitation of the Supper to professing believers; it has also tied

the observance of the Lord's Supper to churches and church membership.

And since Baptists also historically saw believer's baptism as a require­

ment for church membership, they linked these three things: baptism,

church membership and the Lord's Supper. The most recent Baptist

confession, the 2000 revision of The Baptist Faith and Message, echoes

historic language in articulating this link. Of baptism, it says, «Being a

church ordinance, it is prerequisite to the privileges of church member-

43. Solomon Stoddard and John Wesley are some of the most well-known advocates of this position.

For Stoddard, see his own work, "Nine Arguments against Examination Concerning the Work

of Grace before Admission to the Lord's Supper" (1679), and E. Brooks Holifield, The Covenant

Sealed: The Development of Puritan Sacramental Theology in Old and New England, 1570-1720

(New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1974), 208-20. For Wesley, see the citations from his

works in Horton Davies, Worship and Theology in England, vol. 2, From Watts and Wesley to

Martineau, 1690-1900 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), 208 n.69. For a similar argument

by a contemporary British Baptist, see Anthony Clarke, "A Feast for All? Reflecting on Open

Communion for the Contemporary Church;' in Baptist Sacramentalism 2, ed. Anthony Cross

and Philip E. Thompson, Studies in Baptist History and Thought, vol. 25 (Milton Keynes,

UK/Colorado Springs/Hyderabad, India: Paternoster, 2008), 92-116. Clarke proposes an

understanding of the Lord's Supper as "an offer of grace through which all may be invited to find

and indwell the story of God's salvation" ( 1 1 6 ) .

44. Allison, Sojourners and Strangers, 400-01.

45. Carol Pipes, "Lord's Supper: Lifeway surveys churches; practices, frequency:' http://www.

bpnews.net/printerfriendly.asp?ID=38730 ( accessed 9/ 18/ 1 2 ) .

114 CHAPTER4

ship and to the Lord's Supper:' Even more specifically, it explicitly says the

Lord's Supper is for "members of the church?"

Baptists have believed that the Lord's Supper is given in a special way

to the church, and not just to individual Christians. Almost every defi­

nition of the church in Baptist confessions mentions the ordinances as

a constitutive element of the church. For example, the influential New

Hampshire Confession of 1 8 3 3 defines the church as "a congregation of

baptized believers, associated by covenant in the faith and fellowship of

the Gospel; observing the ordinances of Christ:' Therefore, they have been

uneasy about celebrations of the Lord's Supper in non-church contexts,

47
such as a wedding or home Bible study group. It is not so much that such

observances are wrong or sinful as much as they cannot embody fully

the meaning of the Lord's Supper. From texts like 1 Corinthians 1 0 : 1 6 -

1 7 and 1 1 : 2 9 , Gordon Fee has argued that the Lord's Supper is designed

to express, celebrate, and proclaim that those partaking are one body in
48
Christ. This is part of the meaning of the Lord's Supper.

If this is so, then the Lord's Supper is for the regenerate members of

the local church. Whether it is only for the regenerate members of the

local church, or can also be extended to members of other local churches,

or any other professing believer, has been a matter of debate, that we will

examine in more detail in chapter 1 1 . For now, we simply note that like

baptism and congregational church government, the Baptist practice of

the Lord's Supper has been linked to their understanding of regenerate

church membership.

Regenerate Church Membership and Church Discipline

One criticism of regenerate church membership has been that, since

regeneration is an internal, invisible work of God, it cannot be clearly

discerned and is thus an impossible or unworkable requirement for

church membership. But while regeneration may be an internal and invis­

ible work, Baptists historically have insisted that it has external and visible

results. They expected those seeking baptism and church membership to

be "visible saints" whose lives supported their profession of faith. Baptists

have never claimed to be able to know infallibly whether an individual is

46. The Baptist Faith and Message, 2000 rev. ed. (Nashville: Lifeway Christian Resources, 2000), 14.

47. See the discussion in John S. Hammett, 40 Questions about Baptism and the Lord's Supper (Grand

Rapids: Kregel Academic, 2 0 1 5 ) , 42-44.

48. Gordon Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 466, 563-64.

REGENERATE CHURCH MEMBERSHIP 1 1 5

regenerate or not, but they have claimed that a church can and must judge

whether or not a persons life supports or contradicts her or his claim to be

regenerate. The Charleston Baptist Summary of Church Discipline states,

"if their practice contradicts their profession they are not to be admitted

to church membership.?"

For those who at one time gave visible evidence of regeneration and

joined the church but later by their actions betrayed their profession of faith,

the Baptist remedy was the practice of church discipline. It was necessary

if regenerate church membership was to be an ongoing, visible reality, and

not just a theory. It was also possible because churches composed of regen­

erate church members were competent to practice church discipline. We

mentioned above how early Baptists believed Christ gave a gift of "church

power" to congregations rightly gathered (i.e., composed of regenerate,

baptized believers). Virtually every Baptist confession of faith mentions

church discipline as one of the proper exercises of this church power.

Church discipline and regenerate church membership are related in that

the former can be effectively practiced only by a congregation composed of

the latter, and that the former is necessary to maintain the genuineness of

the latter. This commitment to the practice of church discipline and with

it, a commitment to genuinely regenerate church membership, continued

well into the nineteenth century among Baptists in America. In his study of

nineteenth-century Georgia Baptists, Greg Wills states, "They placed disci­

pline at the center of church life . . . . Not even preaching the gospel was more

important to them than the exercise of discipline."? Baptist discussions of the

church in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries almost always included

51
discussions of church discipline, because discipline was directly related to

regenerate church membership, which was central to the Baptist vision of

the church. However, in the latter part of the nineteenth and throughout

the twentieth centuries, church discipline declined almost to the point of

disappearance among Baptists, with predictable results to regenerate church

membership, results we will detail below.

49. Benjamin Griffith, "A Short Treatise Concerning a True and Orderly Gospel Church;' in Dever,

ed., Polity, 99.

50. Gregory A. Wills, Democratic Religion: Freedom, Authority, and Church Discipline in the Baptist

South 1785-1900 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1997), 8. Wills shows that in this era

Baptists disciplined a higher percentage of their members than non-Baptists, and Southern

Baptists disciplined a higher percentage than their Baptist brothers and sisters in the North.

51. All ten of the "historic Baptist documents" written from 1697 to 1874 and included by Dever in

Polity deal with the topic of church discipline.

116 CHAPTER4

Figure 4 . 1 attempts to summarize and make evident the connection

between regenerate church membership and other major components of a

Baptist doctrine of the church, and so justify regenerate church member­

ship as the central Baptist mark of the church.

Regenerate Church Membership . . .

• is preceded and safeguarded by believer's baptism.

• is the basis for congregational church government.

• is reflected and preserved in the Baptist practice of the Lord's

Supper.

• is a prerequisite for effective church discipline and is protected by

church discipline.

Figure 4 . 1 : Regenerate Church Membership as Central to Baptist Ecclesiology

Though regenerate church membership may justly be called the

Baptist mark of the church historically and theologically, in practice the

overwhelming majority of Baptist churches in North America today give

little evidence of such a practice of membership. How that mark disap­

peared and how it may be regained is the topic of the following chapter.
 C H A P T E R S

WHERE WE WENT WRONG AND

H O W WE CAN GET RIGHT

Returning to Faithfulness

THOUGH OFFICIAL STATEMENTS STILL affirm the doctrine of regenerate

church membership, statistics indicate a different reality for the great

majority of Baptist churches in North America. For example, the largest

Baptist denomination in the United States, the Southern Baptist Conven­

tion, reported a total of 47,272 churches in their convention as of 2 0 1 6 ,

with a total of 1 5 , 2 1 6 , 9 7 8 members. But of those more than fifteen million

members, only 5 , 2 0 0 , 7 1 6 , or 34.2% were on average present for the weekly

1
worship in their churches. Certainly every church has members who are

sick or traveling every weekend, but most of the more than ten million

absent members are physically well and in town but choose not to gather

with God's people and remain absent for years at a time. Yet they remain

1. Honesty compels me to sadly report that in the years since the first edition of this book,

things have gotten worse, not better. Comparison with the numbers from 2004 reveals that

since then, total membership has declined by more than one million ( 1 , 0 5 0 , 5 1 6 ) , average

attendance by more than 800,000 (823,573) and percentage of members attending weekly

worship from 37.0% to 34.2%.

117
118 CHAPTERS

members in good standing at most Baptist churches. Only God knows

their hearts, but they are not living like regenerate believers.

Moreover, the conduct of Baptist church members outside of church

attendance is also alarming. Reports find almost no difference in the rate

of divorce among Baptists and the culture as a whole. Many Baptists are

enmeshed in alcoholism, addiction to pornography, spousal and child

abuse, adultery, and virtually every other evil the world offers. One can

live a life with no visible difference from the surrounding nonregenerate

world and be a member in good standing of a Baptist church. Beyond

coming forward at a church service and being baptized at some point in

one's life, there are no requirements for ongoing membership in most

Baptist churches. Maintaining one's membership in the Rotary or Kiwanis

Club is more demanding; they require members to pay dues!

All this invites the disdain of the world. If someone says that the local

Baptist church is full of hypocrites who claim to be good church members

but live no differently than those outside the church, there is little Baptists
2
can offer in the way of reply. Baptist pastors and church leaders know

that if they have a membership of six hundred, rarely are more than

two hundred present. And of the four hundred absent, most have been

chronically absent for years. In fact, in some churches, there may be dead

persons still on the membership roster as members in good standing!

Regenerate church membership cannot be seriously maintained as char­

acterizing most Baptist churches in North America today-a fact that was

formally acknowledged in a resolution adopted by the 2008 meeting of the

Southern Baptist Convention. It states that the "ideal of regenerate church

membership has long been and remains a cherished Baptist principle;' but

in view of the obvious evidence, the Convention urges its churches "to

repent of the failure among us to live up to our professed commitment to

regenerate church membership."

2. This is in fact exactly what a 2007 survey of 1,402 adults who had not attended a worship service

in the previous six months found. Seventy-two percent agreed with the statement, "the church

is full of hypocrites, people who criticize others for doing the same things they do themselves:'

Ed Stetzer stated, "our study shows that many are tripping over the church before they hear the

message of the cross:' See Mark Kelly, "Study: Unchurched Americans Turned Off by Church,

Open to Christians:' http://www.lifeway.com/ Article/Life Way- Research-finds-unchurched­

Americans-turned-off-by-churchopen-to-Christians, accessed 6/ 15/2017.

3. "On Regenerate Church Membership and Church Member Restoration;' l , http://www.sbc.

net/ resolutions/ 1 1 8 9 I on -regenerate-church-membership-and-church-member- restoration,

accessed 6/16/2017.
WHERE WE WENT WRONG AND HOW WE CAN GET RIGHT 1 1 9

How could something that was once so central to Baptist thinking

about the church have been so thoroughly abandoned? A variety of expla­

nations from a number of perspectives are possible.

THE DISAPPEARANCE OF

REGENERATE CHURCH MEMBERSHIP

From the perspective of social scientists, Baptists offer a good example

of the tendency of what they call «sects" to become «churches:' The clas­

sic work of Ernst Troeltsch, The Social Teaching of the Christian Churches,

described sects as those groups that take a separatist and negative approach

to the surrounding culture, while churches are those that take a more inclu­

4
sive, accommodating approach. As Rodney Stark puts it, sects are charac­

terized by «high-intensity" faith; they ask a lot of their members. Over time,

later generations tend not to share the intensity of earlier generations. They

tend to move toward assimilation with society and economic advancement,

meaning they have more to lose from a real commitment to a countercul­

tural faith. Also, leaders of such groups seem to believe that by reducing
5
the level of intensity of commitment, their groups can grow more rapidly.

The desire for growth can easily overshadow the desire for purity among

many pastors and church leaders, especially in a culture and a denomina­

tion that has come to value growth as the greatest, if not the only measure

of a church's success. Some aspects of this analysis do seem to fit what

happened among Baptists, especially in the South. Christine Heyrman, in

a study of nineteenth-century Baptists, Methodists, and Presbyterians in

the South, shows that the percentage of southerners who were evangelical

church members was quite low in the early years of that century and got

larger only as churches relaxed their standards. She concludes that the Bible

Belt in the South began not with a Christian conquest of the culture, but
6
with an adaptation to the culture. But cultural assimilation has always been

a struggle for God's people, from the Old Testament Jews who were told not

to intermarry, to the Catholics who adopted and «baptized" many of the

practices of the pagan tribes they conquered, to modern North American

Baptists who easily fit into contemporary society.

4. Ernst Troeltsch, The Social Teaching of the Christian Churches, trans. Olive Wyon (London: Allen

& Unwin; New York: Macmillan, 1950).

5. Stark, For the Glory of God, 24.

6. Christine Leigh Heyrman, Southern Cross: The Beginnings of the Bible Belt (New York: Alfred A.

Knopf, 1997), 27.

120 CHAPTERS

Likewise, it is generally recognized that Christians, as individuals

and as denominations, tend to rise socioeconomically as they work hard,

become less wasteful, and seek to provide better opportunities for their

children. But, as Jesus said, "it is hard for someone who is rich to enter

the kingdom of heaven" (Matt. 1 9 : 2 3 ) . Thus a declining rate of growth or

commitment tends to accompany a socioeconomic rise.

But alongside the social science explanation there is also an evident

theological or ecclesiological explanation. We noted earlier that believ­

er's baptism and church discipline served to protect regenerate church

membership. Regenerate church membership began to disappear as these

two safeguards were relaxed.

We noted earlier the very strong statements in Baptist confessions of

faith concerning the necessity of visible evidence of regeneration prior to

baptism and church membership. This indicates something of the serious­

ness with which they took baptism. It was regarded as an adult decision, not

to be made lightly. It was said of Richard Furman's ministry at First Baptist

Church of Charleston ( 1 7 8 7 - 1 8 2 5 ) thatin dealing with children the "great­

est care was exercised in guarding against premature professions of piety'?

But over the years the average age for baptisms among Baptists in North

America has steadily declined. Prior to 1966, Southern Baptists did not

even keep statistics on the number of preschoolers baptized, but denomi­

national statisticians apparently became aware by then that it was a growing

trend. Over the next twenty-three years, they saw the number of preschool
8
baptisms triple. It is hard to see how these preschool children could have

convinced earlier Baptists that they were in fact regenerate or competent to

take on the duties and responsibilities of church membership. For example,

among the duties of church members, the Summary of Church Discipline

lists things like contributing to the financial support of the church's minis­

try, praying for the other members, visiting the sick, and using their gifts to

9
serve the church. It is hard to see preschoolers fulfilling these duties.

In 1 9 7 8 , Charles W Deweese noted weak baptismal practices as one of

the trends leading Baptists toward a nonregenerate membership. He speci­

fied lack of pre baptismal training, the tendency to treat the actual baptism

7. This statement is taken from an anonymous biography of Richard Furman, cited in Garrett,

Baptist Church Discipline, 2 1 .

8. See "Distributions of Baptism by Age and Location;' Quarterly Review 27, no. 3 (1967): 44; and

"Number of Baptisms by Age Divisions-1989;' Quarterly Review 50, no. 4 ( 1 9 9 0 ) : 2 1 .

9. Garrett, Baptist Church Discipline, 40-42.

WHERE WE WENT WRONG AND HOW WE CAN GET RIGHT 121

event too lightly, and the movement toward baptizing ever younger chil­

dren as three problem areas."

The validity of many contemporary baptisms was further challenged

by a 1 9 9 3 study done by the (then) Home Mission Board (now North

American Mission Board) of the Southern Baptist Convention. In their

study of adult baptisms ( those over eighteen years of age) in Southern

Baptist churches in 1 9 9 3 , they found that the majority of adult baptisms

(60 percent) could be called rebaptisms. Some were baptisms of those

who had previously been baptized as infants, but 36 percent of these adult

baptisms were of those who had been previously baptized in Southern

Baptist churches. When asked why they were seeking rebaptism, many

said that it was because they had not been regenerate believers when they
11
were first baptized. That means that either these individuals were unusu­

ally deceptive or that some churches and pastors baptized these individu­

als without clear assurance that they were baptizing believers. Many indi­

viduals struggle with this issue. They were baptized as children but see no

evidence of genuineness in their relationship with Christ until much later.

12
They wonder if they have received believer's baptism or not.

By way of contrast, Baptists in other parts of the world do not have

this problem. In Romania, while there is no rule, no one would think of

asking for baptism prior to the age of fourteen. The same is true of many

Baptist groups in Africa and Asia. I was struck by the practices of Baptist

churches I saw in Brazil. Upon profession of faith, a new convert was

placed in a new converts, class for from six to thirteen weeks. The central

purpose of this class was to make as sure as humanly possible that the

individuals involved had understood the gospel and were making valid

professions of faith. After the class, the next step in the process of prepara­

tion for baptism was speaking to the congregation. Candidates described

their experience of conversion and answered questions from the pastor

and congregation concerning what they believed about Christ, their expe­

rience of conviction of sin, and their understanding of the gospel. Only

10. Deweese, A Community of Believers, 1 4 - 1 5 .

11. Phillip B. Jones, et al., A Study of Adults Baptized in Southern Baptist Churches, 1993 (Atlanta:

Home Mission Board of the Southern Baptist Convention, 1995), 5.

12. From twenty-one years of teaching in a seminary and talking to hundreds of students, I can

confirm that this continues to be a problem. I have talked with many students who were baptized

at a young age, and who have later come to question whether or not they knew what they were

doing. Some have concluded they were not believers at the time of their first "baptism:' and thus

have requested believer's baptism.

122 CHAPTERS

then did the congregation vote to baptize the individuals. The contrast

with the lack of care concerning baptismal candidates in Baptist churches

in North America is striking. Regenerate church membership began to

disappear when Baptist churches in North America began to baptize and

bring in members who gave no visible evidence of regeneration.

The second protection to regenerate church membership, church

discipline, began to disappear from North American Baptist churches

in the latter part of the nineteenth century. Studies by Greg Wills and

Stephen Haines concur in seeing the decline beginning then; Haines

13
adds that the decline accelerated in the twentieth century. Haines sees

individualism, a more optimistic view of humanity, and a general «secu­

larizing of values and procedures'Tn American churches, along with a

revulsion against harsh discipline, as among the causes of the decline in

14
discipline. Wills also sees individualism as undermining the author­

ity of the congregation and business methods «replacing the pursuit of

purity with the quest for efficiency?" But he also notes the unconscious

nature of the process: «No one publicly advocated the demise of disci­

pline . . . . It simply faded away, as if Baptists had grown weary of holding

one another accountable.?" This disappearance of church discipline, and

its connection to the loss of regenerate church membership, was recog­

nized in the resolution mentioned earlier in this chapter, adopted by the

Southern Baptist Convention in 2008. It linked the «failure among us to

live up to our professed commitment to regenerate church membership"

to «our failure to obey Jesus Christ in the practice of lovingly correcting

wayward church members" and urged support and encouragement of

churches «that seek to recover and implement our Savior's teachings on

church discipline.l'"

With no serious consideration of baptismal candidates, many nonre­

generate individuals have been baptized and ushered in the front door

into Baptist church membership. With church discipline all but extinct,

the back door is firmly closed, and those persistently acting in nonregen­

erate ways are retained on church rolls. The result is that a claim to regen-

13. Wills, Democratic Religion; and Stephen Haines, "Southern Baptist Church Discipline, 1880-

1939;' Baptist History and Heritage 20 ( 1 9 8 5 ) : 14-27.

14. Haines, "Southern Baptist Church Discipline;' 25-26.

15. Wills, Democratic Religion, 9, see also 139-40.

16. Ibid., 9.

17. "On Regenerate Church Membership and Church Member Restoration;' 1-2.
WHERE WE WENT WRONG AND HOW WE CAN GET RIGHT 123

erate church membership is no longer credible for most Baptist churches

18
in North America.

TOWARD THE RECOVERY OF

REGENERATE CHURCH MEMBERSHIP

No doubt any attempt to move toward a recovery of membership that is

meaningful, that involves genuine commitment and evidence of regenera­

tion, is fraught with dangers. Is such a recovery even a possibility for Baptist

churches in North America today? Could one not argue that earlier Baptists

were too exclusive and unnecessarily turned people away? Would people

not be offended and driven away from Baptist churches today if they were

to return to serious questioning of those coming for baptism and a regu­

lar practice of church discipline? Is this even a battle worth fighting? These

are all serious questions that deserve careful consideration. Any pastor

attempting changes in these areas should move slowly, and build trust

with his people and their understanding of biblical truth as he proceeds.

Particularly, church discipline as redemptive rather than punitive should

be clearly explained. Nonetheless, it seems that the time is ripe for change

in this area. There is in fact anecdotal evidence of a small but encouraging

number of churches adopting new member's classes, requiring commit­

19
ment to a church covenant, and beginning to practice church discipline.

There are four reasons why recovering meaningful membership is a battle

worth fighting. After looking at these reasons, we will explore three practical

suggestions for beginning such a recovery in a local church.

18. It is interesting to note that along with the crumbling of regenerate church membership, the

weakening of believer's baptism, and the disappearance of church discipline, we are also seeing

a widespread rejection of closed communion and the questioning of congregational church

government, giving further evidence that all these elements are interrelated.

19. Such practices have been urged in numerous books in recent years, including Thomas White,

Jason Duesing, and Malcolm Yarnell III, eds., Restoring Integrity in Baptist Churches (Grand

Rapids: Kregel, 2008); Jonathan Leeman, The Church and the Surprising Offense of God's Love:

Reintroducing the Doctrines of Church Membership and Discipline (Wheaton, IL: Crossway,

2 0 1 0 ) ; John Hammett and Ben Merkle, eds., Those Who Must Give an Account: A Study of

Church Membership and Church Discipline (Nashville: B & H Academic, 2 0 1 2 ) ; Mark Dever and

Jonathan Leeman, eds., Baptist Foundations: Church Government for an Anti-Institutional Age

(Nashville; B & H Academic, 2 0 1 5 ) ; and Jeremy Kimble, 40 Questions about Church Membership

and Discipline ( Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2017). Special mention should be made of the work of

Mark Dever, Jonathan Leeman and others through 9Marks, which offers conferences around the

country and now internationally on these and other topics ( those mentioned in Dever's book,

Nine Marks of a Healthy Church), and an extended weekend experience at Capitol Hill Baptist

Church in Washington, DC, allowing participants to see these practices in action in a local

church context. For more information, see www.9Marks.org.

124 CHAPTERS

First, the recovery of meaningful church membership should be the

number-one priority of Baptist churches today, because of the effect it

would have on our corporate witness. Imagine being able to respond to the

common excuse, "Your church is full of hypocrites:' by saying, "Well, we're

not perfect but we are committed to following Christ:' knowing that the

lives and ministries of church members backed that up. Rather than driving

people away, meaningful membership could be the most attractive witness

a church could offer. Greg Wills notes that from 1790 to 1860, when Baptist

churches maintained high rates of discipline, they also maintained high rates

of growth, growing at a rate twice that of the population, while in later years,

as their discipline fell, so did their growth." Could the recovery of meaning­

ful membership allow the light of the gospel to shine through us with greater

clarity and beauty? Rick Warren and Mark Dever, though in quite different

contexts, both speak of the evangelistic impact of a congregation comprised

21
of people whose lives are being changed. Our corporate witness would be

greatly enhanced by the recovery of meaningful membership.

Second, our corporate health would be strengthened. How can the

church live the life we are commanded to live (loving one another, pray­

ing for one another, encouraging one another) if most of our people live

like they are unregenerate? How can our churches govern themselves

responsibly if members are not walking in fellowship with Christ and one

another? Ephesians 4: 1 6 and Colossians 2: 1 9 indicate that the body grows

only when each part does its work, but if parts of the body are not regener­

ate, they will tear down the body rather than build it up.

A third reason for doing the hard work involved in recovering mean­

ingful membership is the potential for awakening literally millions of lost

church members. At the present, chronically absent church members

whose lives give no evidence of regeneration are ignored by most churches.

Many may be trusting in their church membership to get them to heaven.

A recovery of meaningful church membership would involve a challenge

to such members. Sooner or later, they would have to be confronted with

20. Wills, Democratic Religion, 36.

21. Mark Dever, "Pastoral Success in Evangelistic Ministry: The Receding Horizon;' in Reforming

Pastoral Ministry: Challenges for Ministry in Postmodern Times, ed. John H. Armstrong

(Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2001), 255. Dever states, "If you can get a reputation in the community

as a church in which people's lives are actually changed, you will begin to see some amazing

things:' Rick Warren, The Purpose Driven Church: Growth without Compromising Your Message

and Mission (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995), 247, concurs: "What really attracts large numbers

of unchurched to a church is changed lives-a lot of changed lives" ( emphasis in original).

WHERE WE WENT WRONG AND HOW WE CAN GET RIGHT 125

the fact that they are not living as followers of Christ and members of his

body should. The administration ofloving but firm church discipline, after

repeated attempts to bring these individuals to repentance, would be the

most serious way a church could attempt to awaken them to their peril­

ous condition. Such an action would be far more loving than the current

policy of allowing such members to continue in an apparently lost state

without a word of warning.

Finally, recovering meaningful church membership would honor Christ.

Ephesians 5:25-27 describes how Christ died for the church, to present her

to himself as a holy, radiant church. If such was the goal of Christ's cross­

bearing, such must also be the goal of our ministries. Christ is honored when

his bride is holy, but that cannot be as long as many of the members making

up that bride live like lost people. The Charleston Summary of Church

Discipline says that when churches allow unconverted people to crowd into

them, they "make the church of Christ a harlot."? Christ is honored when

churches are composed of people whose church membership means first

of all a genuine, vital commitment to Christ, and second, a commitment to

the people of that local body. Christ is honored when church membership is

meaningful. How can regenerate church membership become a reality in a

church with a membership of six hundred but an average attendance of two

hundred, and where half of the four hundred absentees have been absent

so long that only a few senior citizens even know who they are? How could

a pastor or church leader begin to inculcate the idea of meaningful church

23
membership? Where could he start? Let's look at three suggestions.

Returning to Church Covenants

Charles W Deweese notes that Baptists throughout their history

"have written and used hundreds, and perhaps thousands, of church

covenants.?' These documents are different from confessions of faith in

that conduct is emphasized more than doctrine, though doctrine is often

mentioned secondarily. For all their variety, covenants tend to have a

22. Garrett, Baptist Church Discipline, 36, or Mark Dever, Polity, 122.

23. For more specific suggestions on recovering regenerate church membership, see Mark Dever

and Paul Alexander, The Deliberate Church: Building Biblically in a Haphazard Age (Wheaton,

IL: Good News/Crossway), especially section 1, called "Gathering the Church;' which deals with

church covenants, new member's classes, church discipline, and numerous related topics in a

practical, nuts-and-bolts fashion.

24. Deweese, Baptist Church Covenants, v. In this volume Deweese prints seventy-nine of these

covenants as a representative sample.

126 CHAPTERS

remarkable similarity in terms of contents and purposes. Deweese says

that a commitment to church fellowship, an acceptance of the authority

of the church's discipline, a pledge to support the worship of the church

and personal devotion, and a commitment to mutual care for one another
25
appear in virtually all Baptist church covenants.

Furthermore, one of the major purposes for the use of church cove­

nants is precisely to safeguard regenerate church membership. In the

past, churches constituted around the commitments involved in adopting

a church covenant. Becoming a member involved "owning" the church

covenant. Deweese comments, "Baptists have stated forcefully and repeat­

edly that the covenant idea is essential to the nature, definition, and consti­

tution of a church.?" Church covenants did not require perfection; indeed,

they required nothing that is not explicitly or implicitly commanded in

Scripture, but they did make clear that church membership involved a

commitment that any regenerate person should be able to accept.

In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, the practice of

covenanting declined. A number of factors contributed to this decline,

among them the sacrifice of the ideal of regenerate church membership

to the ideal of numerical growth, the general secularization of American

society, and the unwillingness of church members to hold one another

accountable. Deweese also suggests that Baptists may have been the

victims of the extreme popularity of the 1 8 5 3 church covenant authored

by J. Newton Brown, which was widely adopted by Baptist churches in

America (see fig. 5 . 2 ) . Deweese states:

Covenantal decline also likely resulted from a growing tendency of churches

simply to adopt standardized, uniform covenants printed in external

sources, rather than to write their own individualized statements. Through­

out Baptist history covenantal value and dynamic have correlated closely

with the degree of input that churches have exercised in arriving at the cove­

27
nants they have used.

He adds, "Baptist presses and publications which have sponsored model

covenants have apparently contributed to the weakening of congrega-

25. Ibid., 55.

26. Ibid., 97.

27. Ibid., 36.

WHERE WE WENT WRONG AND HOW WE CAN GET RIGHT 127

tional discipline by making it unnecessary for churches to think through,

struggle with, and write down covenantal responsibilities to which they

are willing to commit thernselves.?"

A church seeking to recover a meaningful membership of regenerate

individuals should begin by discussing among themselves who and what

they are as a church, and what type of commitment Scripture calls them

29
to make to one another as a body of believers. These discussions would

move the church toward adoption of a church covenant. Several examples

of church covenants are included at the end of this chapter, but churches

would do well to personalize and individualize them, so that the congre­

gation as a whole owns it as their covenant, not one imposed upon them.

Then, when the church has developed a covenant that expresses their

commitment to one another and to Christ as his church, the church would

vote to dissolve the present membership and reconstitute around those

30
who sign their names to the church covenant. This would be preceded

by several announcements of the proposed signing day. The pastor should

send a letter to every member of the congregation with the proposed cove­

nant and the decision of the church to reconstitute around it.

There is a biblical precedent for such action in Nehemiah 9 - 1 0 . After a

time of renewal and confession in Nehemiah 8-9, Nehemiah 9 : 3 8 records

the decision of God's people: "we are making a binding agreement, putting

it in writing, and our leaders, our Levites and our priests are affixing their

seals to if' After listing all the leaders by name, the text states that the rest

of the people joined with them ( 1 0 : 2 8 - 2 9 ) . Their "binding agreement;' or

covenant, specified the areas of their lives that needed specific commit­

ments. In their context, the key issues were avoiding intermarriage with

the surrounding pagans, conducting no business on the Sabbath, and

supporting the temple worship (10:30-39). Contemporary covenants

would list the areas of commitment contemporary churches see as central

to their life together. The people in Nehemiah's day concluded with a

summary statement of their commitment: "We will not neglect the house

28. Ibid., 89.

29. Deweese, A Community of Believers, 28-40, gives a helpful outline of some of the practical steps

to take in the preparation and implementation of a church covenant.

30. Alan Neely, "Church Membership: What Does It Mean? What Can It Mean?'' in Shurden,

ed., Proclaiming the Baptist Vision, 47, commends the example of a Mennonite church that

erased their membership list every three years and asked those who wanted to continue in the

fellowship of the church to sign their name, indicating the renewal of their commitment. I would

only change their practice by making it annual rather than triennial.

128 CHAPTERS

of our God" ( 1 0 : 3 9 ) . Adopting a church covenant is one way God's people

today can say, «we will not neglect our church:' This biblical example

gives a beautiful model for contemporary church covenants. The covenant

would be their «binding agreement;' specifying areas of their commitment

to Christ and one another. At the conclusion of a service celebrating the

adoption of the covenant, the church leadership could be invited to come

and sign their names to a roster attached to the church covenant. Then all

who were willing to accept the covenant responsibilities would be invited

to come and sign. The same document and roster would be taken to shut­

in members who were not able to come but are still committed to the

church. Those who sign would become the church's membership. Part of

the process for adding subsequent members would involve the signing of

the covenant, and existing members would be asked to sign their commit­

ment afresh every year. It could become an annual church renewal event.

Churches should consider this approach for three reasons. First, it is

biblical. The type of commitment the New Testament calls church members

to make to each other is «a covenant-like comrmtment?" It is seen in the

dozens of «one-another" commands-at least thirty-such as love one

another (John 1 3 : 3 4 ) , serve one another (Gal. 5 : 1 3 ) , carry one another's

burdens (Gal. 6:2), teach one another (Col. 3 : 1 6 ) , and even confess your

sins to one another (James 5 : 1 6 ) . Any Christian seeking to be obedient to

these commands will have to live in something very much like a covenant

commitment with a group of other Christians. Adopting a church covenant

follows a biblical pattern and calls for a biblical commitment.

Second, it deals with the huge backlog of absentee members in a prac­

tical way. Rather than having the church sort through and make decisions

who to retain and who to purge from their membership, this procedure

places the burden on the individual. The church does not «kick out" or

«excommunicate" anyone. It does, however, respect the decision of indi­

viduals who choose to not come and sign the church covenant. They

have chosen not to be members of the church. Third, it will go a long way

toward accomplishing the goal of restoring a regenerate membership. It is

not sufficient alone, but it is a good starting point.

What about those who do not come and sign the covenant? In most
32
churches, their number will be considerable. Those individuals should

31. Leeman, Surprising Offense, 229.

32. For example, when the First Baptist Church of Union, Missouri, reorganized around the signing
WHERE WE WENT WRONG AND HOW WE CAN GET RIGHT 129

become the object of the congregation's love and concern. They should

be visited to ascertain why they did not come. Efforts should be made

to reclaim them, but not on any terms. They should be welcomed into

Christ's church on Christ's terms, which include commitment to Christ

and to his people, which is what the church covenant expresses. Many

of these people may not be saved, but it is not the job of the church to

pronounce upon that. God alone knows the heart. What the church can

and should say is that a Christian who loves Christ and wants to be part

of his people should have no trouble committing to the church covenant,

and that the church is deeply concerned over the spiritual state of all

those who do not manifest a commitment to Christ. Indeed, it is the

duty of the church to warn such people of the danger they are in. But

it would be less than honest to not acknowledge that chronic church

absentees are some of the hardest people to reach. Many, perhaps most,

will not respond to efforts to win them. They will simply choose to no

longer be part of the church. In truth, they haven't been members since

they dropped out. Their decision not to sign simply recognizes what the

reality has been.

The adoption of a church covenant, with annual renewal, is a good

start, but it is not the only step needed to recover and preserve regenerate

church membership.

Refarming Baptism and Church Membership

Early Baptists had a robust confidence that the church was compe­

tent to examine a prospective baptismal candidate and find evidence of

regeneration prior to administering baptism and welcoming the baptized

believer into the church's membership. Today, many churches and no doubt

many Christians do not share that confidence. They fear the development

of a judgmental attitude that repels those who may be seeking Christ and

drives people away, and they know all too well that all human judgment is

fallible. Yet there are some measures churches may take to be responsible

as well as hospitable in baptizing and welcoming new members.

The first such measure would be a clear separation between welcoming

someone who applies for membership and the official granting of member­

ship itself. In most Baptist churches in North America today, what happens

of a church covenant in 1997, their membership immediately dropped from more than 1,200 to

333, but then it began to grow.

130 CHAPTERS

when someone comes forward at the end of a service and asks for member­

ship? There may be a few moments of whispered conversation but after a

few perfunctory questions the person is presented for a church vote. The

problem is the church members have no basis for voting on such a person.

No one would think of opposing his or her request for membership and

so the vote becomes a meaningless gesture, a relic of an earlier time when

churches took membership more seriously. A better approach would be to

welcome such a person and rejoice with her or him over the decision made,

whether it is to transfer membership or to seek baptism and then church

membership, but to delay a vote on the request for membership until a later

time, when other requirements for membership have been met.

One such requirement could be the completion of a class. Such

classes, often called «new Christians' classes" or «new members' classes;'

are becoming more common in Baptist churches today and bear some

resemblance to the catechumenate of the early church, a time when new

converts were taught the basic elements of the Christian faith before and
33
as preparation for baptism. Among many Baptist groups outside of
34
North America such classes are standard. They serve several important

purposes. They provide a natural context for new prospective members

to meet others and develop relationships. They provide an opportunity to

introduce these individuals to the various ministries of the church. Most

important, they provide a context for discussion of each individual's spiri­

tual condition, for a key component of such classes should be a review of

each person's understanding of the gospel. Even those coming from other

churches need to be given the opportunity of sharing how they came to

know Christ and how they understand the gospel, for in some churches

the gospel is not clearly explained. For those coming as new converts and

requesting baptism, such a review of the gospel is essential. How serious

are we about practicing believer's baptism if we do not even ask those

seeking baptism if they are believers? And, sadly, in today's theological

climate, we need to be a bit more specific, asking them what they believe

and how they came to know Christ.

33. Deweese, A Community of Believers, 43-48, sees such "prebaptismal classes" as vitally important

for regenerate church membership. See the fascinating comparison of these classes to the early

church's catechumenate by Clinton E. Arnold,"Early Church Catechesis and New Christians'

Classes in Contemporary Evangelicalism:' Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 47, no. 1

(March 2004): 39-54.

34. For example, during three years as a missionary in Brazil, I encountered no Baptist church that

did not have a new converts' class.

WHERE WE WENT WRONG AND HOW WE CAN GET RIGHT 131

Once prospective new members have completed this class, those who

conducted the class can recommend admitting them for baptism and/ or

church membership, and based on such a recommendation, members

can vote with some confidence. I know of cases where prospective new

members were converted in the new member's class, and other cases where

prospective new members came to understand the gospel for the first time

in the new member's class and rejected it. They had responded emotion­

ally to a gospel message in a worship service, but when they understood

the commitment involved in trusting Christ, they were unwilling. It is far

better to know and reject the gospel, than to be baptized and think one is

somehow safe without ever coming to an understanding of the gospel or

what it means to place saving faith in Christ.

An objection often raised to such classes, especially in the case of those

who are new converts and seeking baptism, is the claim that the New Testa­

ment pattern was baptism immediately following conversion, with no inter­

vening class. Administering baptism immediately or at least shortly after

conversion makes sense theologically. As will be argued in chapter 1 1 , and

as widely accepted in most denominations, baptism is the rite of initiation,

the occasion in which the new convert is formally brought into church

membership. Moreover, in the book of Acts, baptism, on some occasions,

35
was practiced immediately. But the evidence is not as clear as some think.

There are six occasions in the book of Acts where baptism does seem to be

immediate (Acts 2 : 4 1 ; 8 : 1 2 ; 8:36-38; 10:47-48; 1 6 : 3 3 ; 19:4-5), two others

where the time is not mentioned but seems likely to have been soon ( 16: 14-

1 5 ; 1 8 : 8 ) , and one in which there seems to have been a delay of three days

(9:9, 1 8 ) , depending on when one places Paul's conversion. But there are

sixteen additional cases in the book of Acts, in which the gospel is preached

and/or people believe, in which there is no mention of baptism (Acts 4:4;

5 : 1 4 ; 6:7; 8:25; 9:35; 1 1 : 2 0 - 2 1 ; 1 1 : 2 4 ; 1 3 : 1 2 ; 1 3 : 4 8 ; 1 4 : 2 1 ; 14:25; 1 6 : 5 ; 17:4;

1 7 : 1 2 ; 17:34; and 28:24). And it seems likely that baptism was not immedi-

35. Robert Stein claims, "In the experience of becoming a Christian, five integrally related

components took place at the same time, usually on the same day: repentance, faith, confession,

receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit, and baptism:' Anthony Lane is even more emphatic: "The

New Testament practice of baptism was converts' baptism, the immediate baptism of those

who come to faith as part of their initial response to the gospel:' (Robert Stein, "Baptism in

Luke-Acts:' in Believer's Baptism: Sign of the New Covenant in Christ, eds. Thomas Schreiner

and Shawn Wright, NAC Studies in Bible & Theology [Nashville: B & H Academic, 2006] 52;

Anthony Lane, "Dual-Practice Baptism;' in Baptism: Three Views, ed. David Wright (Downers

Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2009), 1 7 1 .

132 CHAPTERS

ate in a number of these cases, either due to the context (as in Acts 4:4), or

due to the fact that the one extensively involved in preaching the gospel

was Paul, who specifically denied extensive involvement in baptizing ( 1 Cor.

1 : 1 3 - 1 7 ) . It could be objected that this is an argument from silence, but

the silence in this case seems significant. In any case, there is no command

regarding the immediacy of baptism anywhere in the New Testament. By

the second century, the early church began to institute the catechumenate
36
to ensure that those they baptized were indeed converted. That is still the

motivation behind new members' classes.

Caution is especially appropriate in the case of very young children.

Anyone who works with children knows that five-year-olds will readily

ask Jesus into their hearts, but until very recently Baptists would never

have considered baptizing them. Believer's baptism was seen as virtually

synonymous with adult baptism. To request baptism was regarded as a

decision requiring a fair degree of maturity. For a church to grant it was

to welcome that person into the responsibilities of church membership,

which would include participation in the governance of the church, which

seems inappropriate in the case of preschoolers. Overseas, most Baptists

delay baptism until the teenage years, but it is difficult to avoid arbitrari­

ness in setting any specific minimum age for baptism.

Some churches have taken a step in the right direction in requiring

a class before baptism, and limiting that class to those seven years of age

and older. For example, this is the practice of the First Baptist Church

of Orlando, Florida. This should be accompanied by clear teaching that

God can save any child whenever he chooses, and that baptism is in no

way necessary for salvation. So if some children are saved before the age

of seven, delaying their baptism will not somehow endanger their salva­

tion. Instead, it will give their decision time to take root and grow, so that

when they are baptized, it will be more meaningful for them. It should also

reduce the growing number of rebaptisms, those performed when church

members realize later in life that their baptism as a child was not, in fact,
37
believer's baptism. It should also be another helpful step toward recover­

ing regenerate church membership.

36. Arnold, "Early Church Catechesis," 42.

37. Art Murphy, children's pastor at First Baptist Church, Orlando, Florida, says, "We have found

that most children who make that decision [of baptism] under the age of7 tend to need to make

another decision later;' referring to rebaptisms. See Art Murphy, "Leading a Child to Christ;'

SBC Life (June-July 1998), 9.

WHERE WE WENT WRONG AND HOW WE CAN GET RIGHT 133

Others think even seven is too young an age for baptism. While he

states that setting an arbitrary age for conversion is a mistake, William

Hendricks also says, "It is highly doubtful that many children below

the age of nine can express or have experienced despair for sin as radi­

cal separation from God. One cannot be 'saved' until he is aware he is

'lost,"?" This raises the issue of the age of accountability or age of moral

responsibility. In Judaism, that age was twelve. At the ceremony of the bar
39
mitzvah, a child assumed adult spiritual responsibilities. That may be the

context for Paul's statement in Romans 7 : 9 : "Once I was alive apart from

law; but when the commandment came, sin sprang to life and I died:' The

commandment came to a twelve-year-old Jewish boy at his bar mitzvah,

implying that twelve may be the age of accountability. Jesus first began to

manifest his special calling at age twelve (Luke 2:41-50). Furthermore,

in groups that practice infant baptism, the ceremony of confirmation is

usually around the age of twelve. Finally, most developmental psycholo­

gists agree that children reach full moral decision- making ability around

the age of twelve. For these reasons, some see twelve as the appropriate

minimum age for baptism. This is the course taken by Grace Community

Church of Sun Valley, California, whose pastor is the well-known John

MacArthur. They believe baptizing a child who is not genuinely regenerate

does him a disservice and poses a danger if that child takes his baptism as

proof that he is saved. Therefore, they think it is wiser to "wait for more

significant evidence of lasting commitment;' and for "evidence of regen­

eration that is independent of parental control."? Their practice is to wait

41
until a child is at least twelve to look for such evidence.

38. William L. Hendricks, A Theology for Children (Nashville: Broadman, 1980), 249.

39. See David Alan Black, The Myth of Adolescence (Yorba Linda, CA: Davidson Press, 1999), 59-67,

for a discussion of the important transitions that occur at the age of twelve. Black draws upon

the Jewish traditions surrounding the bar mitzvah, the account of Jesus in the temple at the age

of twelve, the findings of developmental psychologists such as Piaget and Erikson, and the study

of stages of faith by James Fowler.

40. Grace Community Church, Evangelizing Children (Sun Valley, CA: Grace Books International,

2003), 6. Also available via the Internet at www.gracechurch.org/ministries.

41. It is also interesting to note that in a 2001 survey of two thousand worshipers in Southern Baptist

churches, of those who affirmed that they had experienced conversion, more indicated that they

had experienced conversion at the age of twelve than at any other year. Indeed, the number

who experienced conversion at that age were more than twice the number for the ages of eleven

and thirteen combined. See "Research Report: Conversion and Witnessing among Southern

Baptists" (Alpharetta, GA: North American Mission Board, SBC, 2002), 2, available at http://

www.namb.net/research.
134 CHAPTERS

Whatever choice a church makes about the appropriate age for

baptism, our concern here is to encourage a thoughtful approach to

receiving children as candidates for baptism and church membership,

one that takes seriously the Baptist commitment to believer's baptism and

regenerate church membership. The key question is not age per se, but the

credibility of a person's profession of faith. We are not to baptize someone

upon any profession of faith, but upon any credible profession of faith.

So what does a pastor do when five-year-old Johnny comes forward

with his parents during the invitation? Certainly he should pray with the

child and his parents, but say to them and the congregation something like

this: "We want to celebrate with Johnny and his parents. Today he is taking

an important step in his relationship with Jesus. We're going to talk with

Johnny and his parents more about this, and at the appropriate time we

will be presenting him as a candidate for baptism and church membership.

Today we invite you to come by and congratulate him and his parents on

the step he has taken today:' This affirms the child and allows the church

to congratulate him and celebrate his decision, but does not prematurely

conclude that the decision made has moved the child from lost to saved,

nor does it commit the church to baptizing the child immediately.

But even with these precautions that would seek to make as sure as

humanly possible that the church only brings in regenerate members,

there will still be a need to deal with members who either are brought in

mistakenly in an unregenerate state or begin sometime after joining to live

like an unregenerate person. Therefore, there will need to be a third step to

restoring meaningful, regenerate church membership.

Redemptive Church Discipline

A strong emphasis on church discipline was a notable characteris­

tic of early Anabaptists and Baptists. It persisted well into the nineteenth

century and is still present in Baptist churches outside North America.

It appeared pervasively in their confessions of faith as a key exercise of

congregational government. It was widely practiced in their churches to

maintain purity. It was a popular subject of discussion among their theo­

logians. However, as we noted above, church discipline among Baptist

churches in North America declined in the late nineteenth century and

nearly disappeared in the twentieth century. It has faced some of the

same obstacles as regenerate church membership as a whole: the overall

secularization of American society, American individualism, the fear of

WHERE WE WENT WRONG AND HOW WE CAN GET RIGHT 135

appearing judgmental, and the desire for increasing numbers. Redemptive

church discipline and regenerate church membership have fallen together.

42
Yet there is a strong biblical basis for church discipline and an evident

need for it in our churches. Polls on virtually every social index show little

difference between the church and the world. Nineteenth-century Baptist

theologian John L. Dagg said perceptively more than a hundred years ago,

"It has been remarked, that when discipline leaves a church, Christ goes

43
with it:' How might pastors go about reinstituting discipline in churches

today? In a word, they should do so carefully:"

Restoring church discipline should not be the first step a pastor takes

upon entering a church. The people need to see and know that he loves

people, lest they think his ideas about church discipline are the product of a

hateful heart. He needs to lay a biblical foundation for church discipline by

preaching and teaching on the texts dealing with church discipline and illus­

trate the teaching with examples of traditional Baptist support for this prac­

tice." These actions should spark some discussion of the issue. That discus­

sion should lead to incorporating some official statements about church

discipline in key documents such as the bylaws and church covenant."

In these documents, it should be clearly stated that becoming a member

of the church and signing the church covenant involves an acknowledg­

ment of the church's authority in matters of discipline. Such statements

can protect the church from lawsuits brought by members who are disci­

plined. They should also describe the goal of discipline as restoration for

the one who is disciplined and protection for the church and its corporate

witness in the community. Furthermore, it should be clearly explained that

discipline is not for the weak one who falls but repents and wants to grow

in Christ but for the strong one who rebels defiantly. It should also state

that discipline is not an excuse to take revenge for personal offenses. Some

42. Matthew 1 8 : 1 5 - 2 0 and 1 Corinthians 5 : 1 - 1 3 are the classic texts, but it also appears in Galatians

6 : 1 ; 2 Thessalonians 3 : 1 4 - 1 5 ; 1 Timothy 1:20; and 5 : 1 9 - 2 0 .

43. J. L. Dagg, Manual of Theology: Second Part, A Treatise on Church Order (Charleston, SC:

Southern Baptist Publication Society, 1858; reprint, Harrisonburg, VA: Gano Books, 1982), 274.

44. See the helpful "Pastor's Checklist" for a helpful and practical list of steps a pastor should take in

preparing for a restoration of church discipline in Jonathan Leeman, Church Discipline: How the

Church Protects the Name of Jesus (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2012), 137-38. Leeman also helpfully

includes a list of common mistakes pastors make in practicing discipline (139-40).

45. Mark Dever, ed., Polity: Biblical Arguments on How to Conduct Church Life (Washington, DC:

Center for Church Reform, 2 0 0 1 ) . All ten of the "historical reprints" that form the bulk of this

book reflect the interest in discipline among Baptists from 1697 through 1874.

46. See Leeman, Church Discipline, 133-36 for suggestions on getting your documents in proper order.
136 CHAPTERS

things should be covered over with Christian love ( 1 Peter 4 : 8 ) . Sins that

threaten the unity of the church, the purity of the church, or its doctrine

are issues that call for church discipline."

With such persons, the church should follow the pattern of Matthew

1 8 . The individual who sees the problem should confront the offending

brother individually and in all humility. Individual visits can continue as

long as the confronter thinks she or he is making progress. But eventually,

if the brother is not won over, two or three others (pastors, staff, friends)

are to go together to appeal to him again. Only if repeated small-group

efforts prove in vain is the issue to go before the church.

It bears repeating that the reintroduction of discipline will not be an

easy task. James Leo Garrett Jr. said a generation ago, "Those who would

lead in the renewal of discipline must be thoroughly convinced of its

terrible urgency?" They must also see clearly the wonderful benefits that

could come in terms of a powerful corporate witness, spiritual growth,

the reclamation of wandering brothers and sisters, the awakening of lost

church members to their peril, and the recovery of meaningful church

membership.

1. Reorganize the church around commitment to a church covenant.

2. Reform the process of baptism and church membership to involve

some genuine examination of the candidate's spiritual condition.

3. Reinstitute a carefully explained process of redemptive church

discipline.

Figure 5 . 1 : How to Recover Regenerate Church Membership

CONCLUSION

These last two chapters have sought to highlight what may be rightly

called the Baptist mark of the church, regenerate church membership.

To put it in more everyday language, being a member of a Baptist church

ought to mean something. Right now, in most cases it means nothing. I

pray that those who read this book will be among those who will faith-

47. Leeman includes nine case studies from real life situations that he was involved with or heard

about. They illustrate the type of situations that do and do not call for discipline. Ibid., 88-122.

48. Garrett, Baptist Church Discipline, 25.

WHERE WE WENT WRONG AND HOW WE CAN GET RIGHT 137

fully labor to see that change, so that Paul's doxology would be true, that

God would be glorified in the church: "Now to him who is able to do

immeasurably more than all we ask or imagine, according to his power

that is at work within us, to him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus

throughout all generations, for ever and ever! Amen" (Eph. 3:20-21,

emphasis added).

COVENANT FROM J. NEWTON BROWN'S

The Baptist Church Manual (1853)

Having been led, as we believe, by the Spirit of God to receive the Lord Jesus

Christ as our Saviour; and, on the profession of our faith, having been baptized

in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, we do now, in

the presence of God, angels, and this assembly, most solemnly and joyfully enter

into covenant with one another, as one body in Christ.

We engage, therefore, by the aid of the Holy Spirit, to walk together in

Christian love; to strive for the advancement of this church, in knowledge,

holiness, and comfort; to promote its prosperity and spirituality; to sustain its

worship, ordinances, discipline, and doctrines; to contribute cheerfully and

regularly to the support of the ministry, the expenses of the church, the relief of

the poor, and the spread of the gospel through all nations.

We also engage to maintain family and secret devotions; to religiously

educate our children; to seek the salvation of our kindred and acquaintances; to

walk circumspectly in the world; to be just in our dealings, faithful in our engage­

ments, and exemplary in our deportment; to avoid all tattling, backbiting, and

excessive anger; to abstain from the sale and use of intoxicating drinks as a bever­

age, and to be zealous in our efforts to advance the kingdom of our Saviour.

We further engage to watch over one another in brotherly love; to remem­

ber each other in prayer; to aid each other in sickness and distress; to cultivate

Christian sympathy in feeling and courtesy in speech; to be slow to take offence,

but always ready for reconciliation, and mindful of the rules of our Saviour, to

secure it without delay.

We moreover engage, that when we remove from this place, we will as soon

as possible unite with some other church, where we can carry out the spirit of

this covenant, and the principles of God's word.

Figure 5.2: J. Newton Brown's Church Covenant

138 CHAPTERS

COVENANT OF SADDLEBACK CHURCH,

LAKE FOREST, CALIFORNIA

Having received Christ as my Lord and Savior and been baptized, and being

in agreement with Saddleback's statements, strategy, and structure, I now feel

led by the Holy Spirit to unite with the Saddleback church family. In doing so, I

commit myself to God and to the other members to do the following:

1. I will protect the unity of my church

. . . by acting in love toward other members

. . . by refusing to gossip

. . . by following the leaders

2. I will share the responsibility of my church

. . . by praying for its growth

. . . by inviting the unchurched to attend

. . . by warmly welcoming those who visit

3. I will serve the ministry of my church

. . . by discovering my gifts and talents

. . . by being equipped to serve by my pastors

. . . by developing a servant's heart

4. I will support the testimony of my church

. . . by attending faithfully

. . . by living a godly life

. . . by giving regularly

* * *

[Each of the four statements above is followed by quotations from Scripture.

After the first are Romans 4 : 1 9 ; 1 Peter 1:22; Ephesians 4:29; and Hebrews

1 3 : 1 7 ; after the second 1 Thessalonians 1 : 1 - 2 ; Luke 14:23; and Romans 1 5 : 7 ;

after the third 1 Peter 4 : 1 0 ; Ephesians 4 : 1 1 - 1 2 ; and Philippians 2:3-4, 7; and

after the fourth, Hebrews 1 0 : 2 5 ; Philippians 1:27; 1 Corinthians 16:2; and

Leviticus 2 7 : 3 0 . ]

49
Figure 5.3: Saddleback Church Covenant

49. Warren, The Purpose Driven Church, 3 2 1 - 2 2 .

WHERE WE WENT WRONG AND HOW WE CAN GET RIGHT 139

COVENANT OF CAPITOL HILL BAPTIST CHURCH,

WASHINGTON, D C

Having, as we trust, been brought by Divine Grace to repent and believe in the

Lord Jesus Christ and to give up ourselves to Him, and having been baptized

upon our profession of faith, in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the

Holy Spirit, we do now, relying on His gracious aid, solemnly and joyfully renew

our covenant with each other.

We will work and pray for the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.

We will walk together in brotherly love, as becomes the members of a

Christian Church; exercise an affectionate care and watchfulness over each

other and faithfully admonish and entreat one another as occasion may require.

We will not forsake the assembling of ourselves together, nor neglect to

pray for ourselves and others.

We will endeavor to bring up such as may at any time be under our care, in

the nurture and admonition of the Lord, and by a pure and loving example to

seek the salvation of our family and friends.

We will rejoice at each other's happiness, and endeavor with tenderness

and sympathy to bear each other's burdens and sorrows.

We will seek, by Divine aid, to live carefully in the world, denying ungod­

liness and worldly lusts, and remembering that, as we have been voluntarily

buried by baptism and raised again from the symbolic grave, so there is on us a

special obligation now to lead a new and holy life.

We will work together for the continuance of a faithful evangelical ministry

in this church, as we sustain its worship, ordinances, discipline, and doctrines.

We will contribute cheerfully and regularly to the support of the ministry, the

expenses of the church, the relief of the poor, and the spread of the Gospel

through all nations.

We will, when we move from this place, as soon as possible unite with

some other church where we can carry out the spirit of this covenant and the

principles of God's Word.

May the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellow­

ship of the Holy Spirit be with us all. Amen.

50
Figure 5.4: Capitol H i l l Baptist Church Covenant

50. Mark Dever, Nine Marks of a Healthy Church (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2004), 2 1 2 - 1 3 .
140 CHAPTERS

STUDY QUESTIONS FOR PART 2

1 . What are some of the lines of evidence for the view that the New

Testament assumes that churches will be composed of believers

only? What are some objections to this view? To what degree do you

find the objections convincing?

2. Identify the roles played by Constantine and Augustine in the devel­

opment of the idea of the church as a mixed body of believers and

nonbelievers.

3. Why do Baptist historians like Leon McBeth say that the origin of

Baptists is best explained as a search for a pure church?

4. How would you compare and contrast the idea of church member­

ship reflected in Baptist confessions of faith with that found in

Baptist churches in North America today?

5 . Describe the relationship or connection of regenerate church

membership with each of the following: believer's baptism,

congregational church government, closed communion, church

discipline.

6. Of the factors mentioned in chapter 5, which do you think were

most influential in the disappearance of regenerate church member­

ship among Baptists in North America? Are there other important

factors not mentioned in the chapter?

7. How do you think people in your church would respond to the sugges­

tions for recovering regenerate church membership mentioned in

chapter 5? What difficulties would be encountered in implementing

them?

BOOKS FOR FURTHER STUDY

Dever, Mark. Nine Marks of a Healthy Church, new expanded edition.

Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2004. While the entire book is helpful, chap­

ters 6-8 (pp. 1 4 6 - 2 1 7 ) speak directly to the issues of chapter 5, partic­

ularly the meaning of church membership and church discipline.

Dever, Mark, ed. Polity: Biblical Arguments on How to Conduct Church

Life. Washington, DC: Center for Church Reform, 2 0 0 1 . This book

reprints ten "historic Baptist documents" that date from 1 6 9 7 to 1 8 7 4 .

All deal with issues of polity and the proper order of a New Testament

church. Regenerate membership and church discipline are two of the

most prominent themes.

WHERE WE WENT WRONG AND HOW WE CAN GET RIGHT 141

Deweese, Charles W Baptist Church Covenants. Nashville: Broadman,

1990. Deweese begins this book with a helpful historical introduc­

tion to the nature, function, and importance of church covenants in

Baptist life, but the bulk of the book is devoted to presenting a collec­

tion of seventy-nine representative Baptist church covenants.

___ . A Community of Believers: Making Church Membership More

Meaningful. Valley Forge, PA: Judson Press, 1 9 7 8 . In many ways this

book provides the perfect companion to chapter 5, for Deweese's two

purposes for this book are to show how Baptist practice today is incon­

sistent with their historic doctrine of regenerate church membership

and to give practical guidelines to help Baptists restore regenerate

church membership. Though perhaps dated in some respects and

difficult to find in print, it is an extremely valuable resource.

Hammett, John S. and Ben Merkle, eds. Those Who Must Give an Account:

A Study of Church Membership and Church Discipline. Nashville: B & H

Academic, 2 0 1 2 . This book examines the twin topics of church member­

ship and church discipline from biblical, historical and practical perspec­

tives, with the awareness that church members are those for whom lead­

ers must give an account.

Kimble, Jeremy M. 40 Questions about Church Membership and Discipline.

Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2 0 1 7 . The format of this book allows readers

to quickly identify and find help on the questions pertinent to them,

and the number of questions addressed allows the author to speak to

a wide range of issues relating the church membership and discipline.

Leeman, Jonathan. Church Discipline: How the Church Protects the Name of

Jesus. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2 0 1 2 . In 140 very small pages, Leeman

gives pastors a gold mine of helpful information about church disci­

pline. Case studies and checklists link the biblical teaching with prac­

tical application.

Wills, Gregory. Democratic Religion: Freedom, Authority, and Church

Discipline in the Baptist South, 1785-1900. New York; Oxford, UK:

Oxford University Press, 1 9 9 7 . Wills makes a detailed study of the

practice of church discipline among Baptists in Georgia, illuminating

its importance and tracing its decline.

 PART 3

HOWISTHE

CHURCH GOVERNED?
 C H A P T E R 6

BAPTIST CHURCH POLITY

The Casefor Congregationalism

IN THE PREVIOUS TWO CHAPTERS, we focused on the issue of regener­

ate church membership. But the very idea of membership implies some

type of organizational structure for the church, one that allows the church

to distinguish between members and nonmembers. Paul instructed the

Corinthian church to discipline, not those outside the body, but those

inside the body ( 1 C o r . 5 : 1 2 - 1 3 ) . They clearly knew who their members

were. Moreover, as we see the church beginning to grow and expand in

the book of Acts, its organizational aspect begins to develop as well, with

structures for leadership and governance emerging. This chapter consid­

ers the implications of these developments under the question, «How is

the church governed?" We begin by noting the importance of this topic for

Baptists, then present in this chapter the case for congregational govern­

ment as the form almost universally affirmed by Baptists. The following

three chapters discuss, respectively, various aspects of church membership

and then the two offices of the church: pastors and deacons.

145
146 CHAPTER6

BAPTISTS AND CHURCH POLITY

While Baptists have never claimed that questions of polity or church

government have the same intrinsic importance as issues such as a proper

understanding of salvation or a correct view of the person of Christ, they

have nonetheless shown a thorough interest in these matters. In Polity:

Biblical Arguments on How to Conduct Church Life, Mark Dever brings

to light ten Baptist documents dating from 1697 to 1874, all dealing
1
with topics relating to church government. To those documents could

be added the full-length treatment by J. L. Dagg in A Treatise on Church

2
Order, chapters on church government in virtually every theology text
3
written by Baptists from A . H . Strong to Millard Erickson, a number of

works sparked by the interest in elders among Baptists,' and even a confer­
5
ence devoted to the topic of polity.

Why have Baptists shown such interest in polity? First, because they

believe that the Bible does give instruction on these matters. What J. L.

Dagg said nearly 1 5 0 years ago is still true: "Church order and the cere-

1. Dever, ed., Polity. The shortest of the ten reprinted documents runs seventeen very full, single­

spaced pages; the longest covers more than one hundred pages. Each contains substantive,

detailed discussion of what they referred to variously as church order, discipline, or polity.

2. Dagg, Manual of Theology.

3. Strong, Systematic Theology; Erickson, Christian Theology.

4. See Gerald Cowen, Who Rules the Church? Examining Congregational Leadership and Church

Government (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2003); Dever, A Display of God's Glory; Chad

Owen Brand and R. Stanton Norman, eds., Perspectives on Church Government: Five Views

of Church Polity (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2004); Steven B. Cowan, ed., Who Runs

the Church? Four Views on Church Government (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2004); and John

Piper, Biblical Eldership, http://www.desiringgod.org/library/tbi/bib_eldership.html, accessed

September 24, 2004. In the years following the first edition of this book, discussions of polity

have continued. Benjamin Merkle has written 40 Questions about Elders and Deacons ( Grand

Rapids: Kregel, 2008) and coedited, with Thomas Schreiner, Shepherding God's Flock: Biblical

Leadership in the New Testament and Beyond (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2014). Phil Newton and

Matt Schmucker have coauthored a comprehensive update of the book previously titled Elders

in Congregational Life (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2005); the new version is Elders in the Life of the

Church: Rediscovering the Biblical Model for Church Leadership (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2014),

and is part of a series of 9Marks Life in the Church books. Jonathan Leeman has published a

fairly comprehensive book on congregationalism, provocatively titled, Don't Fire Your Church

Members: The Case for Congregationalism (Nashville: B & H Academic, 2016) and has coedited

with Mark Dever, Baptist Foundations: Church Government for an Anti-Institutional Age

(Nashville: B & H Academic, 2 0 1 5 ) , which includes a few chapters on the ordinances but is

primarily about matters of church polity. Finally, Gregg Allison has a lengthy section (more than

100 pages) on church polity in his treatise on ecclesiology, Sojourners and Strangers.

5. "Issues in Baptist Polity;' a conference held at New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary,

February 5-7, 2004, hosted by the Baptist Center for Theology and Ministry, drew together

Baptist scholars, professors, pastors, and students to hear more than a dozen presentations on

this topic.
BAPTIST CHURCH POLITY 147

monials of religion, are less important than a new heart; and in the view

of some, any laborious investigation of questions respecting them may

appear to be needless and unprofitable. But we know, from the Holy Scrip­

tures, that Christ gave commands on these subjects, and we cannot refuse

to obey'" For example, A. H. Strong begins his study of polity by giving

fourteen lines of biblical evidence for the fact of organization in the New
7
Testament church. Such evidence still demands investigation.

Second, polity has been of interest to Baptists because it has been one

of the Baptist distinctives. Stan Norman, in his survey of the literature on

Baptist distinctives, notes the prominence of issues of polity in discus­

sions of Baptist identity, especially the advocacy of congregationalism as

8
the New Testament form of church government.

Third, an interest in this issue is especially appropriate today because

it leads us into a number of ongoing discussions in Baptist life. There has

been some movement toward elder rule in a small but growing number of

Baptist churches, and the issues of the authority of pastors and a proper

understanding of the priesthood of all believers have been sources of

controversy in Baptist life in recent years.

Finally, polity should be of interest to all Christians because of its

intrinsic importance. It deals with issues that are inescapable in the actual

day-to-day functioning of any church, including "the nature and purpose

of the church, clergy-laity functions and relationships, and the ministry

within and without the church." Polity is also directly related to one of

the hottest issues in all of evangelical Christianity, that of the propriety of

women serving as pastors or deacons. This and the three following chap­

ters address practical issues concerning how and by whom the church is

led and governed, issues that can affect in profound ways a church's health.

MAJORFORMSOFCHURCHGOVERNMENT
In recent years, it has been commonly argued that there is no one

New Testament pattern of church government; rather, varying patterns are

6. Dagg, Manual of1heology, 12.

7. Strong, Systematic Theology, 894.

8. R. Stanton Norman, More Than Just a Name: Preserving Our Baptist Identity (Nashville: Broadman

& Holman, 2001), 1 1 9 .

9. Norman, introduction to Brand and Norman, eds., Perspectives on Church Government, 10.

Gregg Allison sees theological importance to the issue of church polity in the nature of God

as a God of order, and in the nature of the church, which should reflect Christ's headship and

recognition of the Spirit's gifting in its polity (Sojourners and Strangers, 250-52).
148 CHAPTER6

r e fl e c t e din different parts of the New Testament with no clear blueprint

anywhere. Eduard Schweizer states, "There is no such thing as the New Testa­

ment church order'?" In support of this view, it is true that there are three

major forms of church government that have been developed and utilized

by churches, and it is undeniable that there have been healthy churches

down through history that have operated under each of these three models.

In fact, there is an interesting correlation between dominant forms of

church government and dominant forms of political government. Episcopal

polity, with its monarchical ruling bishop, developed in the context of the

Roman Empire and was strongly influenced by the imperial model of govern­
11
ment, adopting even some of the political terminology of the empire. Pres­

byterian polity developed in the era when republican forms of government

were becoming popular, and congregationalism, with its democratic ethos,

has been extremely popular in North America. Baptists, the largest group

practicing congregational government, have found the atmosphere of North

America particularly congenial and number around three-fourths of their

12
worldwide adherents in the United States alone. Clearly, biblical teaching

has not been the only factor involved in choices concerning church polity.

Yet the lack of an explicit blueprint does not mean that Scripture

has nothing to say about church government, or that all forms of church

government are equally supported by Scripture. Baptists have consis­

tently seen congregationalism as preferable for a variety of reasons. In this

section we briefly describe the other major competing forms of church

government, indicate some strengths and weaknesses for each, and then

present the case for congregational church government.

Episcopalian Church Government

The first major form of church government to emerge clearly in the

postbiblical period was episcopalianism. The episcopal form of govern-

10. Eduard Schweizer, Church Order in the New Testament, trans. Frank Clarke (London, UK: SCM

Press, 1 9 6 1 ) , 1 3 (emphasis added).

11. For example, the term "diocese:' used in episcopal polity for the area supervised by a bishop, was

originally the term used for an administrative district in the Roman Empire.

12. The difference between Baptists in North America and in the rest of the world is striking.

According to 2002 figures from the Baptist World Alliance, of the nearly forty-six million Baptist

church members around the world, more than thirty-three million, nearly 75 percent, live in

North America. Certainly many Baptist denominations in the United States have overly inflated

membership statistics, while the opposite is true among Baptists in many other countries. Still,

it is undeniable that Baptists have flourished in North America. One reason is that Baptist

democratic polity fits the democratic spirit of North America.

BAPTIST CHURCH POLITY 149

ment takes its name from the episkopos, or bishop, who is the key figure in

this system. He has oversight over all the congregations in an area called a

diocese. He alone has the power to ordain those who serve in individual

congregations. These individuals are called by various titles in different

communions: minister, rector, or priest. The bishop assigns these indi­

viduals to their respective congregations. More developed forms of epis­

copalianism add a level above the bishop called archbishop, who is over a

number of bishops. Authority flows from the top down: from archbishop

to bishop to minister/ rector/priest. This is the system followed by the

Roman Catholic Church, the Anglican and Episcopalian Churches, the

United Methodist Church, and many other denominations.

� Archbishop

Bishop .i, � Bishop

A
Minister I Minister I
A
Minister I Minister I
A
Minister I Minister I

Priest I Priest I Priest I Priest I Priest I Priest I

Rector Rector Rector Rector Rector Rector

t t t t t t
Congregation Congregation Congregation Congregation Congregation Congregation

Figure 6 . 1 : Episcopalian Church Government

Advocates of this system can point to the fact that episkopos is one of the

words used for church leaders in the New Testament, but it was the early

church father Ignatius of Antioch, around 1 0 0 - 1 1 5 , who separated the office

of bishop (episkopos) from that of the elder or presbyter (presbyteros), and

elevated the former over the latter. In his letter to the Smyrnaeans, he wrote:

"You should all follow the bishop as Jesus Christ did the Father. Follow, too,

the presbytery as you would the apostles; and respect the deacons as you

would God's law. Nobody must do anything that has to do with the church

without the bishop's approval':" This threefold office, with the authority

13. Ignatius, "To the Smyrnaeans," in Early Christian Fathers, ed. and trans. Cyril C. Richardson,

in collaboration with Eugene Fairweather, Edward Hardy, and Massey Shepherd., Jr., Library of

Christian Classics (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1953; paperback reissue Louisville: Westminster

John Knox, 2006), 1 1 5 .

150 CHAPTER6

given to the bishop, became more and more common in the second and third
14
century, with Irenaeus seeing the bishops as the successors of the apostles,

and Cyprian defining the one true church as those rightly related to the bish­
15
ops. And in the context of the early church, with the church under perse­

cution, and the canon of the New Testament still taking shape and far from

widely available to the average believer (assuming they could read), perhaps

a focus on the bishop was the best guarantor of orthodoxy and unity.

So while advocates of episcopal church government acknowledge that

a fully developed episcopal model is not found in the New Testament,

they also say that it grows out of New Testament teaching, began develop­

ing immediately in the post-apostolic period, is nowhere prohibited by

biblical teaching, and has been beneficial for centuries in the life of the

16
church. In fact, Peter Toon argues that the widespread adoption and long

time span of usage of this form of polity constitute strong arguments in its

favor. If Episcopalian polity is wrong, he writes, then the church was blind

for nearly sixteen centuries, Christ allowed it to be blind all that time, and

17
only in the Reformation did the church ever get its polity right.

However, closer study of Scripture reveals several serious problems

with this view. First, the distinction between episkopos and presbyteros

inherent in Episcopalianism is not sustained by New Testament usage.

Catholic theologian Richard McBrien acknowledges that the two words

were used synonymously in the New Testament, and that we find no

evidence in the New Testament for the idea of a monarchical, ruling sole

18
bishop. Second, the New Testament use of episkopos does not center on

the single bishop, but on a plurality of bishops, who serve together, not to

supervise the leaders of other congregations, but to lead a single congre­

gation. As D. A. Carson notes, "the sphere of responsibility and authority

for these bishops-elders-pastors is the local church; there is little compel­

ling evidence for the view that a bishop . . . exerted authority over several

congregations.?" Third, the episcopal model leaves the local congrega-

14. Irenaeus, ''Against Heresies:' ibid., 3 7 1 .

15. Cyprian, "The Unity of the Catholic Church;' in Early Latin Theology, ed. S. L. Greenslade, Library

of Christian Classics (London: SCM Press, 1956; paperback reissue Louisville: Westminster John

Knox, 2006), 127.

16. Leon Morris, "Church Government:' in Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, ed. Walter Elwell, 2d

ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker; Carlisle, UK: Paternoster, 2 0 0 1 ) , 256.

17. Peter Toon, ''An Episcopalians Closing Remarks;' in Cowan, ed., Who Runs the Church? 258.

18. McBrien, Catholicism, 868.

19. D. A. Carson, "Church, Authority in the;' in Elwell, ed., Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, 250.
BAPTIST CHURCH POLITY 151

tion passive, while the New Testament shows very active churches, fully

participating in governing themselves. Fourth, the episcopal model tends

to view the church in a denominational sense, as the sum total of all of

its affiliated local congregations (i.e., the Episcopal Church, the Method­

ist Church), while the New Testament sees the church overwhelmingly

in a local, congregational sense. The early churches associated with one

another, but they were not institutionally joined.

Finally, the hierarchical nature of episcopal church government seems

contrary to the humble, serving spirit that is commanded of church leaders

(see Mark 1 0 : 4 1 - 4 5 ; 1 Peter 5 : 3 ) . Despite its early appearance and wide­

spread usage in church history, Episcopalianism has the weakest biblical

support of any of the three major views on church government.

Presbyterian Church Government

The presbyterian form is followed, in varying degrees, by a wide vari­

ety of churches. On the local level, Presbyterianism stands for the gover­

nance of the church by the presbyters, or the elders. This group is called

the session in Presbyterian churches, the consistory in Christian Reformed

churches, and simply the elders in some independent or nondenomina­

tional churches. Within the group of elders there is normally one recog­

nized as the teaching elder, or pastor. In a large church other staff members

may also be elders, but usually the majority of the elders are lay members

of the congregation. Congregations typically have some role in the selec­

tion of the elders, either via direct election or giving approval to those

nominated by the existing elders. In either case, however, ruling authority

is vested in the elders.

Denominations who follow Presbyterianism add other organizational

levels beyond the local church. Representatives of each session in an area

form a presbytery. The presbytery can review decisions or resolve disputes

between sessions. The presbytery also holds the official title to the prop­

erty and buildings of the local congregation. Some denominations have a

regional level called the synod, but the highest level is the national level,

the general assembly, composed of representatives from the various pres­

byteries. The general assembly sets overall doctrine and policy for all the

local congregations that compose the denomination."

20. See "Presbyterianism;' in The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, eds. F. L. Cross and

E. A. Livingstone, 2d ed. (Oxford, UK/New York: Oxford University Press, 1974), 1 1 2 0 .

152 CHAPTER6

/ General Assembly�

Synod Synod

A
Presbytery Presbytery
A
Presbytery Presbytery

/\ /\ /\ /\
Session Session Session Session Session Session Session Session

Congregation Congregation Congregation Congregation

Figure 6.2: Presbyterian Church Government

Advocates of Presbyterianism can make a strong case for their view of

church government. Elders were clearly the ruling body in Jewish syna­

gogues, which is the background for the church. Moreover, elder (presby­

teros) is the title most often used for church leaders in the New Testament
21
and is equivalent to the other major term, bishop (episkopos). Elders are

seen in the New Testament as acting to lead the church as a group, and

advocates of Presbyterianism argue that a fair description of the authority

of the elders would be that of ruling the church. Beyond the local church

level, Robert Reymond argues that Acts 1 5 supports the connectionalism

in presbyterian polity, because it records actions involving the Antioch

22
presbytery and the Jerusalem presbytery. However, there also seem to be

four weaknesses in the presbyterian model.

First, the idea that the elders rule the congregation is questionable. That

they have authority is clear, from the command to «submit to their author­

ity" in Hebrews 1 3 : 1 7 , but the key text used to establish the rule of elders is

21. The evidence for the synonymous use of these two terms will be presented in chapter 8.

22. Robert Reymond, "The Presbytery-Led Church;' in Brand and Norman, eds., Perspectives on

Church Government, 107-9.

BAPTIST CHURCH POLITY 153

1 Timothy 5 : 1 7 . The crucial term in that verse is the verb prohistemi, which

can be translated with an authoritative tone, such as "rule" (as in the KJV,

RSV, and ssv) or a milder tone, such as "direct" (NIV) or even "are good

leaders" (HCSB). Three factors, in my interpretation, tip the interpretation

toward the milder tone. The first is the use of prohistemi in 1 Timothy 3 : 5

with the verb epimeleomai as a parallel: "If anyone does not know how to

manage his own family, how can he take care of God's church?" The only

other use of this latter verb is in Luke 1 0 : 3 4 - 3 5 , to refer to the actions

of the Good Samaritan toward the man attacked by robbers, actions that

may have been authoritative, but were certainly not ruling over the man.

This parallel usage in 1 Timothy 3 : 5 , in relation to the qualifications for

serving as an elder, suggests that the interpretation of the same term in

1 Timothy 5: 1 7 should be that with the milder tone. A second factor is

the evidence for the congregation as the highest human authority in many

decisions made by the early church in the New Testament, evidence that

will be presented shortly. Third and finally, consideration of the whole

of New Testament teaching on the nature of spiritual leadership would

suggest that elders are not to rule so much as "lead the church into spiritu­

ally minded consensus.?" Baptists have argued that the responsibility of

elders reflected in this text is not so much ruling as directing; that is, their

24
function is "moral and executive rather than governmental and judicial"

and thus more in keeping with congregationalism than Presbyterianism.

A second weakness of the presbyterian model is that despite Reymond's

contention that Acts 1 3 and 1 5 indicate presbyteries governing the various

25
congregations composing the churches at Antioch and Jerusalem, the

most that can be fairly said is that it is one possible reading of the text, but

not the most likely. Presbyterianism elevates what is a possible inference

26
from Scripture to a normative principle. Reymond has to assume that

there were many congregations in Antioch, that they formed a presby­

tery, that the presbytery sent Paul and Barnabas to Jerusalem, that those

present in Acts 1 5 from Jerusalem represent the presbytery of the Jerusa­

lem church, that the letter they sent out was church law, that all churches

23. Carson, "Church, Authority in the;' 2 5 1 . A very helpful discussion of 1 Timothy 5 : 1 7 and the

whole issue of ruling elders is found in the 187 4 work by William Williams, "Apostolical Church

Polity;' reprinted in Dever, ed., Polity, 533-35.

24. E. C. Dargan, Ecclesiology: A Study of the Churches (Louisville: Chas. T. Dearing, 1897), 24.

25. Reymond, "The Presbytery-Led Church;' 96.

26. Carson, "Church, Authority in the;' 250 ..

154 CHAPTER6

were obligated to obey, and that Acts 1 5 is not a unique occurrence, but a

divinely given pattern. All of these assumptions are simply that: assump­

tions that are not mentioned, much less proven in Scripture. James Leo

Garrett Jr. calls Reymonds argument for Presbyterianism "a network of

unproved hypotheses':" Acts 1 5 may give some basis for churches associ­

ating with one another, but not for churches being ruled by presbyteries.

Third, the division of the elders into teaching elders and ruling elders,

characteristic of most presbyterian forms of polity, is also a debatable

point. It is based primarily on one verse, 1 Timothy 5 : 1 7 , and is under­

mined by the requirement that all elders be "able to teach" ( 1 Tim. 3 : 2 ) .

This verse is far too slender a basis for distinguishing two types of elders.

Finally, while the presbyterian model does make more room for

congregational participation than the episcopal one, it still does not

seem to do justice to the activity oflocal congregations seen in the New

Testament.

Congregational Church Government

In their confessions of faith and other literature, Baptists have stood virtu­

ally unanimously in favor of congregational church government. Beyond

Baptists, more than thirty other denominations in the United States alone
28
practice congregational polity. And, according the Veli-Matti Kark­

kainen, it is the more "participative models of church configuration" that

are growing globally today, a movement that some call "the process of

congregationalization.?" In this model, the congregation exercises the

ultimate human authority in the church, under Christ's divine author­

ity. Christ exercises his headship through the members, as they all seek

together to discern Christ's will for the body. Since all the members are

regenerate and thus indwelt by the Spirit, all are able to receive guidance

from Christ. Thus, congregationalism involves widespread participation,

with every member having an equal voice and vote. In such a system,

27. James Leo Garrett Jr., "Response to Robert Reymond's Presbyterian Polity;' in Brand and

Norman, eds., Perspectives on Church Government, 145.

28. James Leo Garrett Jr., "The Congregation-Led Church;' in Brand and Norman, eds., Perspectives

on Church Government, 1 8 0 - 8 1 .

29. Veli-Matti Karkkainen, An Introduction to Ecclesiology: Ecumenical, Historical and Global

Perspectives (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2002), 59. For the phrase, "process of

congregationalization," Karkkainen cites Russell Chandler, Racing toward 2001: The Forces Shaping

America's Religious Future (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1992), 210; and Miroslav Volf, After Our

Likeness: The Church as an Image of the Trinity (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 12.
BAPTIST CHURCH POLITY 155

leaders such as pastors or deacons may exercise significant influence and

may be entrusted with a measure of authority for acting on behalf of the

congregation on certain matters, but, in the final analysis, the highest

human authority is vested in the congregation, not the leadership.

Congregationalism also highlights the local nature of the church.

Those who affirm congregationalism see no evidence for an authority such

as a bishop, presbytery, or general assembly over local churches in Scrip­

ture and thus have advocated local church autonomy. But local church

autonomy has not meant local church isolation. Baptists, from the earliest

days of their history, have evidenced an associational impulse. Norman

Maring and Winthrop Hudson see "congregational polity, coupled with

an associational principle" as "distinguishing marks" of Baptists down

30
through the ages.

Initially, English Baptists gave a theological grounding to this impulse.

The First London Confession of 1644 urged local churches to associate

with other like-minded churches "as members of one body in the common

faith under Christ their only head:' They saw the church as both local and

universal, and associations of local churches gave testimony to their belief

in the larger body.

Eighteenth-century Baptists in Philadelphia and Charleston reflected

consciously on the role and authority of associations, seeing them as a

great help in resolving questions relating to doctrine or practice, and

recommended by the precedent of the Jerusalem Council in Acts 1 5 . Yet in

the end they gave associations no coercive power or jurisdiction over local

churches. They saw an important distinction between what they called

"church power properly so called:" that is, the power of local churches to

receive and excommunicate members and select their own officers, and

the purely advisory power of an association. The only right reserved to

associations was the right to withdraw fellowship from churches judged to

31
be walking disorderly in doctrine or practice.

30. Norman Maring and Winthrop Hudson, A Baptist Manual of Polity and Practice (Valley Forge,

PA: Judson Press, 1963), 1 5 .

31. Philadelphia Baptists had inherited this idea of the advisory nature of associations from

English Baptists, as reflected in the Second London Confession (see article 26, par. 1 5 ) , which

they adopted, but to it they added a 17 43 work by Benjamin Griffith, "A Short Treatise;' and a

17 49 work, ''An Essay Respecting the Power and Duty of an Association:' The perspective of

Charleston Baptists is seen in their 177 4 work, A Summary of Church Discipline. The earlier work

of Griffith and that of the Charleston Baptists are available in Polity, 9 5 - 1 1 2 , 1 1 6 - 3 3 .

156 CHAPTER6

Nineteenth-century Baptists emphasized even more strongly the local

nature of the church and justified associations primarily on pragmatic

bases, especially their efficiency in supporting the cause of missions.

By 1 9 2 5 , Southern Baptists included an article on cooperation in their

Baptist Faith and Message that denied associations any authority over local

churches and described them as "voluntary and advisory bodies designed

to elicit, combine and direct the energies of our people in the most effec­

tive manner:' In fact, the degree of denominational unity achieved by vari­

ous Baptist groups is remarkable in view of the fact that participation in

such groups is totally voluntary and that local church autonomy is so zeal­

ously guarded.

One congregationalist who includes "strong connections with other

churches" as part of his model of church governance is Gregg Allison.

He cites biblical examples, historical precedence in episcopally governed

and presbyterian churches, and the type of collaboration that has

existed among congregational churches we have been describing as

support for emphasizing strong connections. But Allison sees another

special reason for a renewed emphasis today: "the intense longing for

such cooperation in a growing number of churches today":" Perhaps

North Americans are finally ready to leave their attachment to indi­

vidualism that has led many properly autonomous churches to live in

practice as isolated churches. Such isolation is not a necessary feature of

congregationalism.

Congregation

//
Pastors I Elders I Overseer --�����----'>- Deacons

Associations, Conventions

Figure 6.3: Congregational Church Government

32. Allison, Sojourners and Strangers, 297-98.

BAPTIST CHURCH POLITY 157

In Figure 6.3, the congregation is at the top, representing its final author­

ity and the centrality of the local congregation in the Baptist conception of

the church. There is a double line between the congregation and the pastors/

elders/overseers, representing the fact that the church has final authority

over the elders, but the elders lead the congregation. The deacons serve

both the elders and the congregation, and so has lines from both of them.

However, since the deacons should not exercise leadership over the congre­

gation as a whole, nor over the pastors, there is no line from them to the

congregation or the pastors. Finally, the relationship of the congregation to

associations and conventions is not as direct and intrinsic to congregation­

alism as are its relationship to elders and deacons and so the line to that box

is dotted. Yet associations and conventions have a place in congregational­

ism because they are an appropriate way for churches to show in a visible

way their belief in the oneness of the larger body of Christ.

This theory has not always been fleshed out in practice. Powerful

pastors and dominating deacons have often sought to control congrega­

tions, either alone, in concert with each other, or in competition with each

other. In fact, Wayne Grudem sees five varieties of congregationalism:

single-pastor government, pastor-deacon government, plural local elder

government, corporate board government, and pure democracy govern­

33
ment. Another recent book on five views of church polity includes three

congregational models: single elder-led, democratic, and plural elder-led,

34
still another presents single-elder and plural-elder congregationalism.

All these can be versions of congregationalism if the final court of appeal

is the congregation itself.

Congregationalism allows for leadership by pastors, elders, and/ or

deacons, even strong leadership and a measure of delegated authority. It

does not allow for government by leaders. Congregationalism is govern­

ment by the congregation. Baptists have supported congregationalism,

because they have thought it the most scriptural position. The follow­

ing sections present a case for congregationalism, showing its biblical

33. Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine (Leicester, UK:

InterVarsity/Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994), 928-36.

34. Daniel Akin defends the single elder-led position; James Leo Garrett Jr., the democratic model;

and James R. White argues for a plural eldership in Brand and Norman, eds., Perspectives on

Church Government. In Cowan, ed., Who Runs the Church? Paige Patterson presents single-elder

congregationalism and Samuel Waldron plural-elder congregationalism. The position of Akin

and Patterson could also be called primary elder congregationalism, since they do not deny the

viability of plural elders but only maintain that one elder must be primary.
158 CHAPTER6

support, its theological undergirding, its historical track record, and its
35
practical benefits.

BIBLICAL SUPPORT FOR CONGREGATIONALISM

There are numerous lines of evidence in the New Testament that

support a congregational model of government. James Leo Garrett Jr.

builds the case for congregationalism from six major texts: Matthew

18:15-20; Acts 6 : 3 ; 13:2-3; 15:22; 1 Corinthians 5:2; and 2 Corinthi­

36
ans 2 : 6 . Most who build a case for congregationalism use these texts;
37
others cite additional texts, but these six seem to be the clearest. One

further indirect support comes from the fact that there is no evidence

that any body larger than a local congregation ever made decisions for

a New Testament congregation. Even the decision of the council in Acts

1 5 is presented as what "seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us" and is

urged upon them with the words "you will do well" to accept their recom­

mendation (vv. 28-29). But there is nothing in the account that resem­

bles a general assembly determining policy for churches under their

authority. The apostles, though they exercised authority in the churches

as the authorized representatives of Christ, did not appoint bishops as

their successors over churches but appointed bishops and elders to serve

within churches. These actions seem in keeping with the congregational

principle of local autonomy.

Local autonomy, one aspect of congregationalism, is also supported

by the overwhelmingly dominant use of ekklesia to refer to local churches

38
in the New Testament. There is no superior organizational level to which

churches are accountable.

35. The case for congregationalism is given in slightly different forms in Allison, Sojourners and

Strangers, 278-83; Leeman, Don't Fire Your Church Members, 97-122; Stephen J. Wellum and

Kirk Well um, "The Biblical and Theological Case for Congregationalism;' in Biblical Foundations,

47-78, and Mark Dever, Nine Marks of a Healthy Church (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2000), 206-

14. All four make a fine presentation of the case for congregationalism; my presentation shares

many points with theirs but also differs from their approaches on a number of minor points.

36. Garrett, "The Congregation-Led Church;' 1 5 8 - 6 9 .

37. Wellum and Wellum ("The Biblical and Theological Case for Congregationalism;' 76) cite a

number of additional texts in reference to areas they see as under the congregation's authority in

the New Testament: "the collection and distribution of monies for the relief of the poor ( 1 Cor

1 6 : 1 - 4 ; 2 Cor 8-9); the administration of the Lord's Supper ( 1 Cor 11:20-26);' and a few others,

but the activities referenced in these texts don't seem as clearly governing activities as those in

the other texts.

38. Garrett says ekklesia refers to a local church or churches in ninety-two or ninety-three of its 1 1 4

occurrences. Ibid., 1 7 1 .
BAPTIST CHURCH POLITY 159

Another less obvious but highly important support for congregation­

alism is seen in the dominant images for the church. None are hierarchi­

cal; all are interdependent and breathe the spirit of mutuality. For example,

kingdom is not a major biblical motif for the church, but body and family

are. Alastair Campbell says that in considering New Testament teaching

on polity, it is "of the highest importance" that we recognize the signif­

icance of the fact that the early churches "came to birth within house­

holds or extended families'?" which consist more of brothers and sisters

than rulers and subjects. In examining Luke's view of church leadership

in the book of Acts, Scott Bartchy notes that Luke's ideal for the church

was "a well functioning family;' a model that leads toward an "antipatri­
40
archal perspective" on leadership, a perspective that accords better with

congregational polity than any other model.

A third general or indirect support is seen in the fact that most of

the letters in the New Testament were addressed to churches, not just

to their leaders. Peter, Paul, James, and John seemed to expect churches

to take responsibility for their own doctrine. Paul tells the churches of

Galatia to reject heretical teaching, even if it comes from an angel or

apostle (Gal. 1 : 8 - 9 ) . Apparently, he saw doctrinal purity as a congrega­

tional responsibility.

But the two clearest examples of congregational government come

in the areas of regulating church membership and choosing local leader­

ship." The first area comes to the fore in discussions of church discipline.

In Matthew 1 8 : 1 5 - 1 7 , the final decision for dismissing a member is not

assigned to a bishop or elders, but to the church. Historically, Baptists saw

this as an exercise of the authority given to the church in the gift of the

"keys of the kingdom'' (Matt. 1 6 : 1 9 ) and consistently identified the power

to discipline their members as one of the proper activities of a congrega­

42
tion. Paul assigns the same responsibility to the Corinthian church in

39. R. Alastair Campbell, The Elders: Seniority within Earliest Christianity (Edinburgh, UK: T & T

Clark, 1994), 2 4 1 .

40. S. Scott Bartchy, "Divine Power, Community Formation, and Leadership in Acts;' in Longenecker,

ed., Community Formation in the Early Church and in the Church Today, 97-98.

41. Interestingly, these are also the two activities most commonly highlighted in seventeenth­

and eighteenth-century Baptist confessions of faith as belonging to the church. D. A. Carson

adds a third general area of congregational responsibility: "They enjoyed responsibility for

and authority over a substantial range of questions affecting internal order:' Carson, "Church,

Authority in the;' 2 5 1 .

42. See, for example, the statement of the London Confession of 1644: "Christ has likewise given

power to his whole Church to receive in and cast out, by way of Excommunication, any member;
160 CHAPTER6

1 Corinthians 5 : 9 - 1 3 . He describes their action later as " [ t j h e punishment

inflicted on him by the majority" (2 Cor. 2 : 6 ) , indicating a congregational

proceeding. Since the individual involved had repented, Paul now urges

them to restore him. Again, the responsibility is placed on the congre­

gation. The phrase "the punishment inflicted on him by the majority;' is

interesting. While not explicit, it seems entirely possible and probably

likely, that the congregation here took some type of vote and made a deci­

sion that was not unanimous.

In the area of choosing leaders, some see the action of the believers

in Acts 1 in choosing a replacement for Judas as indicative of congrega­

tionalism, but clearer is the example in Acts 6, where the apostles told

the "whole group" to choose those who would assist the apostles. This

passage, Acts 6: 1 - 6 , is commonly seen as the origin of the office of deacon.

The narrative here is really quite astonishing. You have a very young and

very large congregation, a very important decision to make, and the most

mature members of the congregation, the apostles, aware and available.

Wouldn't it make more sense to restrict decision-making on such an

important issue to mature leaders, like the apostles? But here it is the apos­

tles who charge the congregation to make the decision as to who will serve

("choose seven men from among you") and the text adds, "This proposal

pleased the whole group" (Acts 6 : 5 ) and "They chose:' It seems to clearly

reflect congregational decision- making. I will confess that I am curious

as to how such a large congregation came to an apparently swift decision

that the apostles accepted (I wish we had the minutes of any meetings they

held!). But the clear implication is a high degree of trust in the ability of

the congregation to be able to receive guidance from God and make deci­

sions pleasing to Christ, the head of the church.

In Acts 1 3 : 1 - 3 , it seems that the church was involved in commis­

sioning Paul and Barnabas to their work as missionaries, and upon their

return, Paul and Barnabas reported to the church (Acts 1 4 : 2 7 ) . In Acts

1 5 , the church was involved in the discussion (vv. 4, 1 2 ) and decision (v.

22) of the group there. It is true Paul and Barnabas appointed elders for

and this power is given to every particular Congregation, and not one particular person, either

member or Officer, but the whole:' This statement is clearer than most, but there are similar

indications in confessions up to the nineteenth century, when the practice of discipline began to

decline. For the connection of this power with the keys of Matthew 1 6 : 1 9 , see Benjamin Griffith,

"The Glory of a True Church, and Its Discipline Displayd," in Dever, ed., Polity, 63-91, a work

with the subtitle, "Wherein a true Gospel-Church is described. Together with the Power of the

Keys, and who are to be let in, and who to be shut out:'
BAPTIST CHURCH POLITY 161

the churches they founded ( 1 4 : 2 3 ) , and Paul instructed Titus to do the

same for the churches in Crete (Titus 1 : 5 ) , but these are clearly excep­

tional situations, both because the congregations involved were in their

infancy and because an apostle, or in the case of Titus, an associate of

an apostle, had unique authority. All these examples of congregational

action, along with instructions about the procedure to follow in disci­

pline of an elder ( 1 Tim. 5 : 1 9 - 2 0 ) , support the final responsibility of the

congregation over its leaders.

THEOLOGICAL UNDERGIRDING

F O R CONGREGATIONALISM

Some support congregational polity, even though they see the New

Testament teaching on church government as incomplete, inconclusive, or

indefinite. They do so because they see congregationalism as undergirded

by certain important theological principles. Leon Morris says, "Perhaps

it would not be unfair to say that the chief scriptural buttresses of this

position [congregationalism] are the facts that Christ is the head of the

church . . . and that there is a priesthood of all believers.":" The principle

of Christ's headship over the church is seen as supporting congregational

government because the other forms of church government place the

church in the position of obeying a bishop or presbytery or general assem­

bly, rather than Christ. As Gregg Allison puts it, "The organic connection

between Christ and his body, together with the authority that such head­

ship entails, precludes human intermediaries wielding authority over the

church.":" Of course, it could be argued that the presbytery or bishop is the

ordained way for Christ to direct his people, but it has seemed to many

that the directness of Christ's authority over the church is compromised by

the other forms of government. Congregationalism preserves the congre­

gation's direct responsibility to submit to Christ's headship. Their ability

to discern and obey Christ's direction is assured by the second principle

supporting congregationalism, the priesthood of all believers.

The priesthood of all believers is seen by many as the strongest support

for congregational government. James Leo Garrett Jr., Millard Erickson, and

Stanley Grenz all acknowledge its importance. Garrett notes "the important

connection between the priesthood of all Christians and Congregational

43. Morris, "Church Government;' 257.

44. Allison, Sojourners and Strangers, 2 8 1 .

162 CHAPTER6

polity?" Erickson says, "It is my judgment that the congregational form of

church government most nearly fulfills the principles that have been laid

down. It takes seriously the principle of the priesthood and spiritual compe­

tency of all believers':" Grenz states, "proponents claim that democratic

congregationalism is the consistent outworking of . . . the priesthood of all

believers'?" The priesthood of all believers affirms that each believer is both

able and responsible to seek God directly and receive guidance from him

directly apart from any human intermediary. Yet each individual believer is

also fallible. Thus, the proponents of congregationalism have seen that the

best way for the church to find God's direction is for all the believer-priests

to seek God's face and come to a consensus as to his direction for the church.

As Grenz says, "This comprises the central principle of democratic congre­

gationalism. The entire company of believers discerns Christ's will for his

people?" But here the warning given in a previous chapter bears repeating:

This principle of the priesthood of all believers, and its support for congre­

gational church government, depends on the congregation being composed

of true believers, for only such are believer-priests and only such are able to

seek and receive guidance from God. Congregational church government

demands regenerate church membership.

The Historical Track Record of Congregationalism

There are three points to be made from history in support of congrega­

tionalism. The first is simply to note that there is some evidence of congre­

gationalism in the early post-New Testament church. Though the growing

importance of the bishop is obvious in the second and third century, there

is also evidence of some congregationalism in the early church. Clem­

ent of Rome acknowledges the action of the church in Corinth, which

had removed from the office of bishop certain men who had either been

appointed to that office by the apostles or "with the consent of the whole

church:' Clement was displeased with what they had done, but it shows

that the move to episcopal governance was not immediate. In that congre­
49
gation, there remained some congregational decision- making. An even

45. Garrett, "The Congregation-Led Church;' 185.

46. Erickson, Christian Theology, 1096.

47. Grenz, Theology for the Community of God, 723.

48. Ibid., 724.

49. Clement, "The Letter of the Church of Rome to the Church of Corinth, Commonly Called

Clement's First Letter, 44;' in Early Christian Fathers, 63-64.

BAPTIST CHURCH POLITY 163

clearer example is found in the Didache. There, an unknown teacher

instructed a rural early-second-century congregation to elect their own

leaders: "You must, then, elect for yourselves bishops and deacons who

are a credit to the Lord?" But admittedly, the evidence from early on is

scant. Episcopal government did become the norm as we move through

the second century and into the third and beyond.

But here we may note a second point. The period of the dominance

of episcopal government coincided with the period when most people did

not have access to the New Testament. Once the Gutenberg printing press

revolutionized bookmaking, and the Bible became more widely avail­

able and more regarded as the standard for all areas of theology, includ­

ing ecclesiology, almost immediately, congregational church government

began being proposed, by the early Anabaptists and later by the English

Separatists, some of the Pilgrims and Puritans, and the Baptists.

Finally, in the light of the last several centuries, what is the track

record of congregationalism? Some charge congregationalism as foster­

ing an environment where church fights and splits commonly occur, or

51
even at best, as an inefficient way of decision-making. Those who have

lived in congregational contexts may have seen both, but that is not the

whole story. Mark Dever states what he sees as "the verdict of history. . . .

While it is clear that no certain polity prevents churches from error, from

declension, and from sterility, the more centralized polities seem to have a

worse track record that does congregationalism in maintaining a faithful,

vital, evangelical witness.?" Perhaps the clearest evidence here has been

the conservative resurgence in the Southern Baptist Convention. Begin­

ning in 1979, leaders sought to address what they saw as a leftward drift

in the Convention agencies and seminaries. Over a fifteen-year period,

there were able to bring about a remarkable change in theological direc­

tion in their seminaries and agencies, such that one writer has called it

"the Baptist Reforrnation.?" Some have questioned the need for change
54
or the true motives behind their actions, but one fact seems indisput­

able. Leaders in the Southern Baptist Convention were able to succeed

50. "The Didache, 16" in ibid., 178.

51. Allison, Sojourners and Strangers, 285-86, notes and gives his response to such criticism.

52. Mark Dever, A Display of God's Glory (Washington, DC: Center for Church Reform, 2001), 38.

53. Jerry Sutton, The Baptist Reformation: The Conservative Resurgence in the Southern Baptist

Convention (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2000).

54. See the four widely varying accounts "The Southern Baptist Convention, 1 9 7 9 - 1 9 9 3 : What

Happened and Why?" Baptist History and Heritage, October 1995.

164 CHAPTER6

where attempts at change in other denominations did not, in large part

because the Southern Baptist Convention preserved in its constitution

elements of the congregationalism practiced in its churches. In the end, it

was thousands of grassroots Southern Baptists, sent out by their churches,

who voted for change. They were mobilized by very able leaders, but they

were able to effect change, because the convention machinery was finally
55
accountable to local congregations.

PRACTICAL BENEFITS

OF CONGREGATIONALISM

The primary practical benefit of congregationalism is that it provides

for what is a practical inevitability. Mark Dever asserts that every church

is congregational in nature; that is, they can continue to exist only as the

people support them. The people can always vote, with their funds and

feet if in no other way. Dever says, "The congregation will have their say.

That's a simple fact. It is like gravity. It's just a matter of the way things

work'?" But rather than merely acknowledging that a degree of congrega­

tional involvement is inevitable and seeking to minimize it, a wiser course

is heartily adopting a full congregationalism and accepting the challenge

of developing a congregation that can responsibly and fully participate in

governing itself, rather than a congregation that passively accepts what­

ever the leadership hands down.

James Leo Garrett Jr. says congregational polity is "more capable

than other polities of developing loyalty to and support of the congre­

gation" and it is "very likely to produce stronger, more mature Chris­

tians than other polities."? Correspondingly, a lack of involvement and

participation in discerning the direction of the church seem likely to

weaken the sense ofloyalty and commitment among the members of the

congregation.

Some might question the practical benefits of congregationalism.

How practical is it, some might ask, for a congregation to have to gather

to vote on every minute decision it faces? But this is to misunderstand

55. There have been a multitude of analyses of the controversy in the SBC. For a short synopsis and

bibliography, see Chute, Finn, and Haykin, The Baptist Story, 285-92. Surprisingly, few comment

on how it was the ability of local congregations to send messengers, who in turn could vote for

presidents and trustees committed to change, that was crucial to the controversy ever beginning.

56. Dever, Nine Marks of a Healthy Church, 225.

57. Garrett, "The Congregation-Led Church;' 193.

BAPTIST CHURCH POLITY 165

congregationalism. It does not entail that the congregation meet and

vote to decide every matter. In practice, most congregational churches

delegate a good deal of decision-making authority to their leaders, and

there seems biblical support for doing so. A measure of authority is

given to leaders in order for them to lead, with final governing human

authority given to congregations, both under the ultimate author­

ity of the Head of the church, Jesus Christ. Thus, the model affirmed

by many today is an elder ( or pastor) led, congregationally governed

58
church. As to which decisions should be left to the leaders and which

reserved for the congregation, New Testament examples of congrega­

tional action include matters of church discipline and restoration of

membership (Matt. 1 8 : 1 5 - 1 7 ; 1 Cor. 5 : 9 - 1 3 ; 2 Cor. 2 : 6 - 8 ) , selection of

leaders (Acts 6 : 2 - 6 ) , setting apart of some for certain responsibilities

(Acts 1 3 : 2 - 3 ) , and perhaps congregational responsibility for maintain­

ing soundness of doctrine is indicated in the fact that most of Paul's

letters are sent to the churches, not just to their leaders (Gal. 1:8-9).

But there may be some pastoral wisdom in involving the congregation

also in other decisions, especially those that impact the congregation as

59
a whole (matters like budgets, or building a new facility). At any rate,

all that congregationalism requires is that congregations have the final

governing authority; it does not require that they vote on every minute

decision churches must make.

Another objection some may make to the practical benefits of congre­

gationalism is the association of congregationalism with "democratic

processes.'?' In our increasingly global church, how practical is it to ask

churches to operate through democratic processes in contexts where

democracy is unknown? In many contexts, there may need to be extensive

teaching, even in Western contexts, to call members to take up the responsi­

bilities Scripture lays on church members in the area of church governance,

but democratic processes may be interpreted more broadly than just the

political methods used in the West. For example, a tribe that has always

58. Gregg Allison describes his model as "plural-elder-led, deacon and deaconess-served,

congregational church with strong connections" (Sojourners and Strangers, 297). Others simply

affirm elder-led congregationalism (Leeman, Don't Fire Your Church Members, 122; Wellum and

Wellum, "The Biblical and Theological Case for Congregationalism:' 76).

59. For a thoughtful treatment of how to decide which decisions should be left to leaders and which

to reserve for congregations, see Leeman, Don't Fire Your Church Members, 123-52.

60. This phrase is from the definition of a church in The Baptist Faith and Message, VI: "Each

congregation operates under the Lordship of Christ through democratic processes:'

166 CHAPTER6

made decisions consensually but informally, could reach a decision that

would represent the will of the congregation, without ever having a Western

style business meeting and taking a vote. Again, what is of the essence of

congregationalism is the congregation as the final human authority govern­

ing the church; how the congregation works together in making those deci­

sions may involve a variety of processes. Those processes may be called

democratic as long as in the end it is the demos, the people, who make the
61
decisions. But they do not necessarily have to be Western processes.

CHALLENGES FACING CONGREGATIONALISM

Despite the long and virtually unanimous support for congregational­

ism among Baptists, it is facing a number of challenges today, of both a

practical and a theological nature. If genuine congregational government

is to endure among Baptists, these challenges must be addressed.

The Needfor Responsible, Regenerate Congregations

As we noted in the previous chapter, congregational church govern­

ment presupposes regenerate church membership, for only a regenerate

congregation can govern itself responsibly. But we also noted that regen­

erate church membership is largely a fiction among Baptist churches in

North America today. Most churches have large number of members

who have not been present in worship services for years, have shown no

signs of commitment to Christ or to the local church, and yet remain as

members in good standing and may well show up to vote in crucial church

business meetings. With such congregations, many Baptist pastors think

of church business meetings with a sense of dread and fear, as something

to be avoided as much as possible, for they have seen all too often how

what is theoretically supposed to be a search by a congregation ofbeliever­

priests for Christ's guidance has degenerated into an angry argument

among factions vying for control. For their part, many members of such

congregations find business meetings either boring or unedifying and stay

away in droves. Either way, congregational church government is frus­

trated by the lack of congregations able and willing to govern themselves

responsibly. The need to develop responsible congregations is probably

62
the number-one challenge facing Baptists in North America today.

61. Dever, Nine Marks of a Healthy Church, 2 1 2 .

62. For suggestions as to how to develop responsible congregations, see the material in chapter 5.
BAPTIST CHURCH POLITY 167

The Rise of Larger Churches

Another practical challenge to congregationalism is that raised by

the trend toward larger churches. One observer has noted that this is a

feature of the contemporary scene unprecedented in church history:

"The recent rise of larger and larger churches at an increasingly fast rate

of growth is unique to this final quarter of the twentieth century?" This

trend is continuing in the twenty-first century. A 2 0 1 0 survey of Prot­

estant churches concludes, "while the United States has a large number

of very small churches, most people attend larger churches. The National

Congregations Study estimated that the smaller churches draw only 1 1

percent of those who attend worship. Meanwhile, 50 percent of churchgo­

ers attended the largest 10% of congregations (350 regular participants

64
and up ):' In the Southern Baptist Convention alone, there are at least 545
65
churches with one thousand or more in weekly attendance.

The difficulties raised for congregational government by churches of

such size are threefold. First is the difficulty of getting such large numbers

of people to come and participate in congregational government. Stanley

Grenz says, "Democratic congregationalism is the active role of all in the

corporate determination of Christ's will, not the rule by the voting major­

ity at meagerly attended church meetings.?" The larger the church, the

greater the practical difficulty it will face in getting widespread congrega­

tional involvement.

Second, even if a large church can get all its members present, it will

face the difficulty of ensuring that all the members are well informed on the

issues under consideration. For this reason, Millard Erickson feels that in

larger churches more of the decision- making has to be entrusted to leaders

chosen by and responsible to the congregation. He cautions, however, that

"the elected servants must be ever mindful that they are responsible to the

whole body'"" Even smaller churches typically entrust many minor deci-

63. John Vaughan, Megachurches and America's Cities: How Churches Grow (Grand Rapids: Baker,

1993), 40.

64. The survey found that 59 percent of churches have 99 or fewer attenders; only 2.5 percent of

churches have attendance of one thousand or more, but around 4 million more people worship

in those few larger churches than in all the smaller churches combined (see Hartford Institute for

Religion Research, "Fast Facts about American Religion," at http://hirr.hartsem.edu/research/

fastfacts/fast_facts.html#sizecong, accessed 6/21/2017).

65. This is from a 2 0 1 4 report by Thom Rainer (see thomrainer.com/2014/07/2014-updatelargest­

churches-southern-baptist-convention, accessed 6/21/2017).

66. Grenz, Theology for the Community of God, 724-25.

67. Erickson, Christian Theology, 1005.

168 CHAPTER6

sions to their leaders, not feeling the need to be consulted on every specific

item. The larger the church, the greater will be its need for delegation of

authority from the congregation to its leaders. But it should be clear that

the authority with which they act is delegated from the congregation.

Third is the fact that most megachurches tend to be "heavily pastor

68
centered" and to be pastor-led in practice, even if congregational in theory.

John Vaughn argues that churches naturally evolve from congregational to

presbyterian to episcopal as they grow in numbers, and sees such a develop­

ment as positive, for he sees congregational polity as a hindrance in grow­

69
ing a megachurch. Yet the first church described in the book of Acts, the

church at Jerusalem, was a megachurch and yet there is strong evidence of

its congregationalism (see Acts 2:44-47; 4:32; 5 : 1 2 ; 6:2-6; 1 5 : 2 2 ) . Larger

churches can practice congregationalism, but they must sufficiently value it

to make the greater effort that will be necessary to so effectively.

Strong Pastoral Leadership and Church Growth

Another challenge related to the rise of larger churches is the strong

pressure for churches to grow numerically and the claim that strong pastoral

leadership is essential for such growth to happen. In the last generation a

whole school of thought has developed called church growth. Those involved

in this school of thought study numerically growing churches and try to

isolate important factors contributing to growth. One factor they highlight

is the importance of strong pastoral leadership, or what is sometimes called

70
a CEO ( chief executive officer) model of pastoral leadership.

Strong pastoral leadership is not in itself incompatible with congrega­

tional government, but often the CEO model brings with it the corporate

concept of hierarchical authority with control being exercised from the top

down. As David Crosby notes in his study of church government in the

church growth movement, the CEO model fits much more naturally in

68. Garrett, "The Congregation-Led Church;' 190, citing Wilson Hull Beardsley, "The Pastor as

Change Agent in the Growth of a Southern Baptist Mega Church Model" (D. Min. diss., Fuller

Theological Seminary, 1 9 9 1 ) .

69. Vaughan, Megachurches and America's Cities, 84-85.

70. This style of pastoral leadership is advocated by a number of church growth authors, including

Peter Wagner, Leading Your Church to Growth (Ventura, CA: Regal Books, 1984); Lyle Schaller,

The Decision-Makers: How to Improve the Quality of Decision-Making in the Churches (Nashville:

Abingdon, 1974); and Glen Martin and Gary Mcintosh, The Issachar Factor (Nashville:

Broadman & Holman, 1993). Thom Rainer, Surprising Insights from the Unchurched (Grand

Rapids: Zondervan, 2001) has found strong support for the link between strong pastoral

leadership and church growth in his research.

BAPTIST CHURCH POLITY 169

episcopal or presbyterian polity than in congregationalism." Yet the imper­

ative to grow is so strong in some Baptist circles, and decision- making is

so often governed by pragmatism rather than theological or ecclesiologi­

cal considerations, that the perceived advantage of strong pastoral leader­

ship in church growth has led many to an abandonment of congregational

government in practice, if not theory. Demonstrating that effective pastoral

leadership is consistent with congregational church government is one of

the challenges facing congregationalism and its advocates.

The Emergence of Elder Rule

One challenge to congregational rule goes beyond practical difficulties

to a theoretical and theological issue. It is the small but noticeable emer­

gence of Baptist churches practicing elder rule. There is nothing intrinsi­

cally problematic for Baptists in the use of the term elder. The New Testa­

ment uses the terms elder, overseer ( or bishop), and pastor interchangeably

and so did Baptists for much of their history. The 1 8 5 9 Abstract of Princi­

ples, which still serves as one of the guiding documents for two Southern

Baptist seminaries, refers to the scriptural church officers as "Bishops or

Elders, and Deacons:' There were even those called "ruling elders" among

some Baptist churches in the eighteenth century, especially those influ­

enced by the Philadelphia Association. But these ruling elders functioned

more as assistants to the pastor, and could be as accurately called "lay

elders;' for they did not share the preaching and teaching responsibilities

of the pastor or minister. In any case, their rule was under the authority of

the congregation and thus unlike the authoritative rule of a presbyterian

72
ruling elder. Even that type of ruling elder was generally discarded by

Baptists in the nineteenth century.

Today, some Baptist churches are adopting a plurality of elders and

utilizing lay elders, while retaining a commitment to congregational

73
government. Elder leadership can coexist with congregational govern­

ment. Recently, however, other Baptist churches have allowed major deci-

71. David Eldon Crosby, "Church Government in the Church Growth Movement: Critique from a

Historic Baptist Perspective" (Ph.D. diss, Baylor University, 1989), 325-32.

72. See the discussion by Charles W Deweese, "Baptist Elders in America in the 1700s: Documents

and Evaluation:' The Quarterly Review (October-December 1989): 57-65; the analysis by

Slayden Yarbrough, "Southern Baptists and Elder Rule;' The Oklahoma Baptist Chronicle 37, no.

2 (Autumn 1994): 17-32; and the evaluation by Greg Wills, "The Church: Baptists and Their

Churches in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries;' in Dever, ed., Polity, 19-42.

73. This is the perspective of Dever, A Display of God's Glory, 16-43.

170 CHAPTER6

sions on matters of staff, budget, and congregational direction to be made

by groups of elders with little or no congregational participation. Stanley

Grenz calls this development "semi-Presbyterianism"?' It seems to involve

a serious, essential movement away from congregationalism.

To some degree, more decision - making by elders may be related to

the earlier challenge we mentioned, the rise of large churches. In large

churches, the difficulties of getting the congregation together and inform -

ing them of the issues, coupled with the necessity of timely decisions, may

lead the congregation to delegate a larger measure of decision- making

authority to their leaders, but subject to congregational oversight and

review. What is troubling about some of the forms of emerging elder rule

is the deemphasis on the role and importance of the congregation. In most

of these churches, there is still some degree of congregational involvement

or oversight, but whereas traditional congregationalism expected active

congregational participation and ensured ultimate congregational control,

some of the newer forms of elder rule minimize congregational participa­

tion and blur the lines of ultimate authority and control.

Two questions merit examination. First, why is this challenge to the

longstanding Baptist commitment to congregational church government

arising-and particularly, why today, after centuries of congregational­

ism? Second, how should Baptist churches respond? To the first question,

there are numerous suggested answers. Bill Leonard sees an authoritarian

mood among some Baptists who emphasize verses that speak of the duty

of believers to obey their leaders (Heb. 1 3 : 1 7 ) and speak of elders ruling

75
the church ( 1 Tim. 5 : 1 7 ) . Such verses certainly may have been muffled

by the individualistic, egalitarian culture of America where nobody would

think of ordering someone else to obey, and may need more emphasis in

our churches today, but Paul never expected uncritical obedience. He only

called believers to follow him as he followed Christ and taught the true

gospel ( 1 Cor. 1 1 : 1 ; Gal. 1 : 8 ) . Moreover, there have been many Baptists

who have held a high view of pastoral authority without rejecting congre­

gational government. The two involve no necessary conflict.

James Leo Garrett Jr. thinks Southern Baptists are being influenced

by popular independent preachers such as John MacArthur who practice

74. Grenz, Theology for the Community of God, 725.

75. Bill Leonard, "The Church:' in Has Our Theology Changed? Southern Baptist Thought Since 1845,

ed. Paul A. Basden (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1994), 177-78.

BAPTIST CHURCH POLITY 171

76
elder rule in their churches. The development of radio and television

ministries has certainly broadened the reach of popular preachers, and

there is no doubt some truth to Garrett's assessment. But there are two

more important motivating factors, one on the side of leaders and one on

the side of the congregations.

The most important factor motivating pastors to move toward elder

rule is the difficulty in working with congregations often filled with

members who give no evidence of regeneration and do not seem intent on

seeking Christ's will in congregational business meetings. To a pastor who

feels his congregation is obstructing his attempts to lead them in godly

ways, elder rule might be very appealing.

On the part of congregations who offer no opposition to allowing the

elders to make decisions for them, the most important factor is the devel­

opment of a consumer attitude toward church membership. American

culture has been characterized by recent authors as a consumer culture.

Rodney Clapp describes it this way: "We are no longer 'students; but

'educational consumers; no longer 'worshipers; but 'church shoppers; no

longer 'patients; but 'health consumers; and so on."? Bruce Shelley and

Marshall Shelley have reflected specifically on how this consumer culture

has entered and affected the church. They say, "Many people assume that

their needs count for more than their loyalty. If their needs go unmet, they

are quick to switch to another church, just as they would doctors, grocery

stores or airlines to find better service?"

It is interesting to contrast this with the attitude of the early Baptists of

the Philadelphia Association. In 1 7 2 8 , a member church of the association

asked for their advice on the question of whether or not it was proper to

allow a member of one church to move his letter to another church, when

his residence had not changed. The association answered in the negative,

reflecting the idea that church membership is not a matter of finding a

place where one's needs may be met, but finding a place where one can
79
obey God's commands with a clear conscience.

76. James Leo Garrett Jr., Systematic Theology: Biblical, Historical, and Evangelical (Grand Rapids:

Eerdmans, 1995), 2:580.

77. Rodney Clapp, "Consumption and the Modern Ethos;' in The Consuming Passion: Christianity

and the Consumer Culture, ed. Rodney Clapp (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1998), 7 - 1 5 .

78. Shelley and Shelley, Consumer Church, 166.

79. Excerpts from the minutes of the Philadelphia Association are available in Leon McBeth, A

Sourcebookfor Baptist Heritage (Nashville: Broadman, 1990), 147-55.

172 CHAPTER6

This consumer attitude does not tend to develop the type of commit­

ment needed to sustain responsible self-government, but it is increas­

ingly prevalent in many churches. Many members view their commit­

ment to their church much as they view their commitment to shopping at

Walmart. They may enjoy the goods and services offered, but they are not

remotely interested in working with fellow shoppers to govern the store. If

a better deal comes along, or things change and Walmart no longer meets

their needs, they will vote with their feet and shop elsewhere.

It is the unconscious adoption of this idea of consumer membership

that explains why there has been no complaint from the congregations in

the churches that have adopted elder rule. Members seem glad to dispense

with business meetings and leave running the church to the elders. Pastors

are glad to be able to implement their plans without interference from

apathetic or hostile congregations. Thus, the challenge to congregational­

ism from elder rule may be one some pastors are slow to address.

Baptists should resist elder rule, for two reasons. First, while elder or

pastoral leadership is crucial, and the use of a plurality of elders can be

cogently argued, elder leadership does not negate the case for congrega­

tional government. In the end, the biblical support and theological under­

girding for congregational government is much stronger than the case for

elder rule. Second, the motivations behind elder rule ( the desire of pastors

to avoid dealing with difficult congregations and the idea of consumer

membership) do not lead in a healthy direction. The idea of consumer

membership is profoundly nonbiblical and does not produce the type of

committed members the church needs, and elder rule cuts off the wisdom

available for decision-making from the whole body of God's people.

The biblical support, theological undergirding, and practical benefits of

congregationalism are sufficient to justify a call to pastors and churches

to address the contemporary challenges, including that of elder rule, and

develop congregations committed to responsible self-government.

Though we have already discussed at some length the importance of

regenerate church membership in a previous chapter, the role of church

members in congregationalism and the value in cultivating meaningful

membership are so crucial that before moving on to discuss leaders, we

will turn next to a discussion of church members.

 C H A P T E R 7

MEANINGFUL CHURCH

MEMBERSHIP

INTRODUCTION

THE WHOLE IDEA OF MEMBERSHIP has fallen on hard times in contempo­

rary North American life. In Bowling Alone, sociologist Robert Putnam has

shown the overall decline in membership in all types of societies, includ­

1
ing churches. No doubt there are many factors in this decline. Individual­

ism, consumerism, a widespread questioning of the value of institutions,

rejection of authority, and what one calls "commitment phobia" are all

part of the "cultural baggage" those advocating church membership must

2
face. In addition, the perceived failure of churches to help their members

grow as disciples of Christ and the corresponding perception of church

members as hypocritical, harsh, and judgmental deepen the difficulty that

3
church membership faces.

Perhaps partly as a response to these difficulties, and perhaps partly

helping to create such difficulties, many churches ask very little of those

who do come as members. But such an approach is disastrous for churches

1. Robert Putnam, Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community (New York:

Simon & Schuster, 2000), 70-71. Drawing on multiple sources, Putnam sees a long, slow decline

of about 10 percent in church membership from the 1960s to the 1990s. The decline is most

pronounced in the "younger generations" (79).

2. Jonathan Leeman, The Church and the Surprising Offense of God's Love: Reintroducing the

Doctrines of Church Membership and Discipline (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2 0 1 0 ) , 357.

3. Dan Kimball, They Like Jesus but Not the Church: Insights from Emerging Generations (Grand

Rapids: Zondervan, 2007). The major part of the book (73-209) is devoted to six problems

emerging generations have with churches, including what is perceived as their political agenda,

judgmental spirit, oppression of females, homophobia, arrogance and ignorance concerning

other religions, and fundamentalist interpretations of the Bible.

173
174 CHAPTER 7

as a whole, and especially for churches that practice congregational church

government. For congregationally governed churches, membership must

be taken very seriously, for it is members who have the final authority, and

for all churches, it is impossible to have a healthy church without healthy

church members. Thus, in this chapter we will broaden the discussion

beyond polity alone, to other aspects of the importance of meaningful

church membership. Here we will be building on, but also going beyond,

the earlier discussion of regenerate church membership in chapters 4

and 5. We will review briefly the biblical basis of membership and other

requirements for church membership (beyond regeneration), but focus

most of the attention on what makes membership meaningful-namely,

its very important privileges and responsibilities. Fortunately, there has

been a growing recognition of the crucial importance of recovering mean­

ingful church membership in recent years, and thus we have a number of

4
helpful works to draw upon.

The Biblical Basis of Church Membership

Some have thought the idea of church membership must be a modern,

Western invention and certainly not anything practiced by New Testament

churches. While there may not have been written lists, the early churches

certainly knew those who were in the church and those in the world, those

subject to the church's discipline and those the object of the church's evan­

gelism (see 1 Cor. 5 : 9 - 1 2 ) . Even the term "member" has a biblical basis,

in the comparison of the church to the one body of Christ composed of

many members (Rom. 1 2 : 4 - 5 ) . But the idea of membership is inherent in

salvation itself.

In 1 Peter 2 : 5 , we find that coming to Jesus is coupled with "being built

into a spiritual house;' with "spiritual house" used here as an image for

the church. All those who come to Jesus he wants to connect with other

4. Jonathan Leeman has been prolific on this topic, writing The Church and the Surprising Offense

of God's Love, along with shorter works ( Church Membership: How the World Knows Who

Represents Jesus [Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2 0 1 2 ] ) , and Don't Fire Your Church Members. Mark

Dever has contributed chapters on church membership to numerous books (Nine Marks of a

Healthy Church, Restoring Integrity in Baptist Churches, and one of four chapters on church

membership in Those Who Must Give an Account: A Study of Church Membership and Discipline,

eds. John S. Hammett and Benjamin L. Merkle [Nashville: B & H Academic, 2 0 1 2 ) . The author

of this work, in addition to editing and contributing to the work just cited, has contributed two

chapters on church membership to Baptist Foundations, and most recently, Jeremy Kimble has

written 40 Questions about Church Membership and Discipline (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2 0 1 7 ) .
MEANINGFUL CHURCH MEMBERSHIP 175

believers in a local church. This shows, as Joseph Hellerman puts it, that

"salvation is a community-creating event" such that "salvation includes

membership in God's group;' for which he coins the term "familification."

Church membership is also necessary to be an obedient Christian.

We are told to "not give up meeting together" with other Christians (Heb.

1 0 : 2 5 ) , to use our spiritual gifts "for the common good" ( 1 Cor. 1 2 : 7 ) with

the goal being "that the body of Christ may be built up" (Eph. 4 : 1 2 ) . There

are also dozens of "one another" commands (love, pray for, teach, build

up, etc.). How could a believer obey such commands apart from meaning­

ful, active church membership?

Two other responsibilities make the necessity of church member­

ship even more inescapable. We are to hold one another accountable, and

when necessary, discipline one another ( 1 Cor. 5 : 1 1 - 1 2 ) . But this is only

for those "inside;" that is, members of the church. Finally, we are given

commands on how we are to relate to leaders. We are to respect and honor

those who are over us, and submit to their authority ( 1 Thess. 5: 1 2 - 1 3 ;

Heb. 1 3 : 1 7 ) . The only context for such accountability and leadership in the

New Testament is the church.

The Requirementsfor Church Membership

The first, most obvious and most important requirement for member­

ship is genuine saving faith. The order of events in 1 Peter 2:4-5 is coming

to Jesus, then being joined together with others "being built into a spiritual

house:' The same order is inherent in the very idea of membership as it is

understood in the New Testament. How could one be a member of the body

of Christ if not vitally joined to the Head? How could one be a part of the

family of God if not given a right into that family by receiving Christ (John

1 : 1 2 ) . But since we spent considerable space in chapters 4 and 5 arguing for

regenerate church membership, and since it seems obviously connected to

what salvation does and what church members are called to do, I do not

think we need to further emphasize this most important requirement.

Though no verse says it explicitly, and while there are certainly excep­

tions, there is a strong cumulative case for baptism as a second require­

ment for church membership. Baptism is mentioned as seemingly the first

step in the Great Commission, where Jesus commands his followers to

5. Joseph Hellerman, When the Church Was a Family: Recapturing Jesus' Vision for Authentic

Christian Community (Nashville: B & H Academic, 2009), 124, 132.

176 CHAPTER 7

«make disciples of all nations, baptizing them" (Matt. 2 8 : 1 9 ) . It fits the

order of events on Pentecost Day, where those who «accepted his message

were baptized, and about three thousand were added to their number that

day" (Acts 2 : 4 1 ) . That pattern-accepting the message, being baptized,

and being added to the church-seems to fit the meaning ofbaptism as the

rite of entry into church membership and the inclusion of baptism among

the items of unity in Ephesians 4:3-6. The fact that there are a number

of baptisms in the book of Acts with no mention of those baptized being

added to the church is due largely to the pioneer context in Acts, where

many of the converts were the first in their area to believe. There were not

yet any existing churches into which they could be baptized. But through­

out subsequent church history, almost all Christian churches, Protestant

and Catholic, have seen baptism as the doorway into church membership.

Historically, Baptists have not seen infant baptism as valid baptism

at all, and so have required believers who want to become members of

their churches to receive believer baptism. But recently, British Baptists,

some «theologically progressive Baptists" in North America, and even the

strongly evangelical Baptist pastor John Piper have dropped or have advo­

cated dropping the requirement for believer's baptism as a requirement for

6
Baptist church membership. Even among a number of the students this

author teaches at a Baptist seminary there have been questions raised as to

the necessity or importance of maintaining this requirement.

I suspect at least one of the reasons for the changing views on this

requirement is the changing context. In the nineteenth century, a fairly

evangelical Protestantism was widely shared by Methodists, Presbyterians

and Baptists. Their debates naturally turned to the issues on which they
7
disagreed, and believer's baptism was central among such issues. In

today's context, in which evangelical beliefs have been widely abandoned

by many Christian groups, not to mention society at large, genuine believ-

6. For the movement among British Baptists and theologically progressive North American

Baptists, see Nathan Finn, "A Historical Analysis of Church Membership;' in Hammett and

Merkle, Those Who Must Give an Account, 73-75. For John Piper's advocacy of dropping the

requirement of believer's baptism for membership, see the Desiring God website ( desiringgod.

org) and search for documents on baptism and church membership.

7. For example, John L. Dagg, in his Treatise on Church Order, devotes sixty pages to arguing for

believer's baptism by immersion, considering numerous objections from paedobaptists and

giving detailed responses. See John L. Dagg, Manual of Theology. Second Part. A Treatise on

Church Order ( Charleston, SC: Southern Baptist Publication Society, 1858; reprint Harrisonburg,

VA: Gano Books, 1982), 1 3 - 7 3 .

MEANINGFUL CHURCH MEMBERSHIP 177

ers in Christ, who so share our evangelical views that they want to join our

churches, seem to have so much in common with us that it dwarfs the

relatively unimportant things on which we differ. For example, Baptists

and paedobaptists enjoy fellowship and friendship across denominational

lines in groups like Together for the Gospel and other parachurch groups.

Many have recognized the value of differentiating various levels of importance

attached to different doctrines, labeling some as first order, others second order,

and others third order.

First-order doctrines are essential Christian doctrines, affirmed by all Chris­

tians (such as the Trinity, the incarnation, crucifixion, and resurrection of Jesus,

salvation by grace through faith).

Second-order doctrines are traditional denominational doctrines, the matters

that have caused denominations to be created (such as baptism, the Lord's

Supper and differing forms of church government).

Third-order doctrines are those on which most churches allow disagreements,

even among their members (matters such as the order of events surround­

ing the second coming of Christ, the nature of the millennium, and, for most

Baptists, differences on the doctrine of election and associated issues).

Figure 7 . 1 : Theological Triage

By common consent, baptism is a doctrine on which Christians can

disagree and still regard one another as true believers. It is a second-order

doctrine, different from first-order doctrines on which all Christians must

agree. But I would argue that it is a second-order doctrine, which is held as

a defining belief for a denomination, and not a third-order doctrine, one

on which members of a local church may differ among themselves. A clas­

sic example of a third-order doctrine is one's eschatological perspective on

the millennium, rapture and so on. Most Baptists have agreed to require

very little theological agreement on such matters as a requirement for

church membership. But baptism seems to be a different type of doctrine

than such aspects of eschatology, because baptism is a command given

178 CHAPTER 7

to us by Christ. I do not feel much of a sense of obligation to persuade

others to my view on eschatology; I do feel some concern on the matter of

baptism. My paedobaptist friends may be at peace with their conscience

on this matter, but I feel conscience bound to honor Christ's command

to be baptized and not to move a command to the level of something

optional for those walking together in church membership. This has been
8
and remains the majority view among Baptists.

A third requirement that also is more implicit than explicit is what

9
may be called a covenantal type of commitment. Earlier (chapter 5) we

discussed the historic Baptist practice of gathering a church around a church

covenant, and recommended doing so as a step toward recovering regener­

ate church membership. But even if a church adopts no formal statement,

simply accepting the responsibilities the New Testament places on church

members and understanding the type of relationship that is meant to exist

among church members involves the type of commitment that is best signi­

fied as covenantal. In Acts 2:42-47 and 4:32, the earliest church members

began from the start to care for one another. The epistles add the dozens of

"one another" commands (Rom. 1 2 : 9 - 1 6 ; Col. 3 : 1 3 - 1 6 ; 1 Thess. 5 : 1 1 - 1 5 ;

Heb. 10:24-25) that could only be fulfilled in the context of committed rela­

10
tionships. Paul took it as axiomatic that the members of a body care for one

another ( 1 Cor. 1 2 : 2 5 - 2 6 ) . And the image of the church as a family, and the

practice of calling a fellow church member "brother" or "sister;' clearly point

to an extremely committed relationship, especially when family and sibling

11
terminology are understood in their first-century context. I recommend

formalizing this type of commitment in a carefully written covenant that is

officially affirmed by both congregation and new member on the occasion

8. For a spirited defense of believer's baptism as a requirement for church membership, see Bobby

Jamieson, Going Public: Why Baptism in Required for Church Membership (Nashville: B & H

Academic, 2 0 1 5 ) . For more on baptism, see chapter 1 1 of this book and John S. Hammett, 40

Questions about Baptism and the Lord's Supper (Grand Rapids: Kregel Academic, 2 0 1 5 ) .

9. Allison, Sojourners and Strangers, 124-32. While acknowledging no specific use of covenantal

language for the relationship of church members to one another, Allison argues that the New

Testament does provide a "covenantal framework" for the church. Similarly, Alan Hirsch calls

"a covenantal community" one of the two "irreducible minimums of a true expression of

ecclesia" (Alan Hirsch, The Forgotten Ways: Reactivating the Missional Church [ Grand Rapids:

Baker, 2007], 40).

10. To get an idea of how pervasive such "one another" commands are in the New Testament, see

the dozens of verses cited by Mark Dever, The Church: The Gospel Made Visible (Nashville: B & H

Academic, 2012), 41-43, especially 8-26.

11. Hellerman, When the Church Was a Family, 34-96.

MEANINGFUL CHURCH MEMBERSHIP 179

of the new member being received as such, but the key is living in relation­

ships that have that covenantal type commitment.

The Privileges ofMembers

Prospective members should be told up front what they can expect

to receive as members and what will be expected of them as members,

and both should be reflected in the church's covenant. While some of the

privileges may be enjoyed by even a casual visitor, some are limited only

to members.

One privilege would be the blessings of the ministry of the body. The

church takes responsibility to love and care for its members. This includes

pastoral care from the church's leaders, as it is the members for whom leaders
12
will give account, but also includes the one-another ministry of members,

for Ephesians 4: 1 6 indicates that believers grow to maturity only through

13
the ministry of the whole body. We are to love all (regular attenders, visi­
14
tors, and members), but members have a priority (Gal. 6 : 1 0 ) .

Another privilege is that of corporate worship. While personal

worship should be a part of every believer's life, Christ pledges to meet

with his people in a special way when they gather in his name (Matt. 1 8 : 2 0 ;

1 Cor. 5 : 4 ) . The teaching of gifted pastors, the observance of corporate

ordinances, the edification from praying and singing together, and the

pleasure of fellowship should all be part of what happens when the body

gathers. These blessings fall to some degree on all who attend, but it would

be natural for fellowship to be deeper among members, and some would

argue that observance of the ordinances should be limited to members

only. We will discuss this point further in our chapter on the ordinances.

A third privilege I think the body is designed to provide but most do

not seek is corporate confirmation of individual guidance ( see Acts 1 3 : 1 - 3

for one example). One area most Christians struggle with at some time

12. See the moving meditation on the weightiness of this responsibility by Andrew Davis, "Those

Who Must Give an Account: A Pastoral Reflection;' in Hammett and Merkle, Those Who Must

Give an Account, 2 0 5 - 2 1 .

13. Among the conclusions James Samra reaches in his dissertation on "the undisputed Pauline

epistles" is the crucial role of participation in the body in the process of maturation. See James

Samra, Being Conformed to Christ in Community: A Study of Maturity, Maturation and the Local

Church in the Undisputed Pauline Epistles, Library of New Testament Studies 3320 (New York

and London: T & T Clark, 168-69.

14. For a list of the responsibilities a church and its leaders should provide to its members, see the

sample church membership covenant in Mark Driscoll and Gerry Breshears, Vintage Church:

Timeless Truths and Timely Methods (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2008), 3 1 3 - 1 4 .

180 CHAPTER 7

in their life is finding God's will for a particular situation. I believe that if

relationships in the body are what they should be, there should be some

in the body who can seek to understand God's guidance on behalf of a

sister or brother and confirm ( or not) their sense of guidance. But this will

only be possible if there is the type of covenant commitment that should

15
characterize membership.

A final privilege that only members receive is the blessing of corpo­

rate accountability. Not only are pastors charged to watch over their flocks

(Heb. 1 3 : 1 7 ) , but members of the body are also to watch over one another.

Hebrews 1 2 : 1 5 calls on believers to "see to it" that none of them fall prey

to bitterness, and in the end, it is the church which takes the final respon­

sibility for discipline. It is possible for churches to become harsh and

judgmental, but the greater danger in our day is the opposite extreme.

Jesus did say, "first take the plank out of your own eye" before you criticize

another, but his point was that "then you will see clearly to remove the

speck from your brother's eye" (Matt. 7 : 3 - 5 ) . We too often take Jesus's

words as an excuse to leave the plank in our own eye and the speck in our

brother's eye. Giving others the right to hold you accountable is part of the

covenant commitment made in membership. Having people actually care

enough to hold you accountable is an incalculable blessing that may save

you untold heartache.

The Responsibilities ofMembership

In large measure, the responsibilities of church membership involve

living out that covenantal type commitment that we argued is a require­

ment for membership and intrinsic to it. Members promise to love and care

for these people who will also be loving and caring for them. They pledge

faithfulness in attending, in praying and caring for others, and in caring for

the church's welfare as a whole (which in turn involves informed participa­

tion in the church's business). It should also include explicit acceptance of

the church's right and responsibility to discipline them should they stray (a

sad but necessary legal protection in our society today).

One responsibility explicitly given for the common good is the use of

one's spiritual gifts ( 1 Cor. 1 2 : 7 ) . Of course, this presupposes that one of the

ministries of the body to members is to help them discover their areas of

15. See Hellerman, When the Church Was a Family, 1 6 3 - 8 1 , for how his church sought to provide

this blessing to its members.

MEANINGFUL CHURCH MEMBERSHIP 181

giftedness (by advising, teaching, giving feedback and opportunities), but

this does not exhaust all aspects of service. Spiritual gifts are no excuse to

neglect the common duties of membership, like loving, encouraging, teach­

ing and praying for one another, even if not particularly gifted in such areas.

A common rubric of member responsibilities uses the idea of steward­

ship of one's time, talent and treasure. The stewardship of time and talent

involve a commitment to faithful attendance and service as mentioned

above. The commitment to financial stewardship I see as proportionate

giving. I think tithing is a good place to start, but believe the New Testa­

ment standard is proportionate giving, and encourage giving a higher

16
percentage as God blesses us financially. Moreover, while I think the

church should be first in a member's giving, I do not believe in what is

sometimes called "storehouse tithing" (giving a tithe to the church before

giving to any other ministry). Faithful stewardship may also involve

support of other ministries.

One final matter that is both privilege and responsibility is also one

reason for the inclusion of this chapter in the part of this book dealing

with polity. It is the member's privilege and responsibility to participate in

congregational governance. While voting on matters needing the church's

decision is perhaps the most traditional and visible part of this privilege/

responsibility, it by no means exhausts it. To give intelligent, godly input

into church decisions, the member must first be praying about the matters

facing the church, be seeking to become informed about such matters, and

be listening to the Lord and to the leaders of the church.

As we argued in the previous chapter, Scripture gives examples of

congregations participating in matters such as who is to be baptized and

admitted into church membership, who is to be disciplined, and who are

to be recognized as leaders. Not mentioned in Scripture, but commended

by pastoral wisdom, would be seeking congregational input on decisions

with major financial consequences and congregational impact (budgets,

buildings, etc.). The tendency in some churches to see "business meet­

ings" as boring and things to be avoided betrays our weak understand­

ing of church membership and our lack of commitment to meaningful

16. Proportionate giving; that is, giving a higher percentage of one's income as it increases, seems

the principle taught in 1 Corinthians 16:2. For more on tithing, see David Croteau, Perspectives

on Tithing: 4 Views (Nashville: B & H, 2 0 1 1 ) ; for a broader perspective on stewardship, see Craig

Blomberg, Neither Poverty Nor Riches: A Biblical Theology of Possessions, New Studies in Biblical

Theology 7 (Nottingham, UK: Apollos/Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1999).

182 CHAPTER 7

membership. The business of the church should be boring only to those

who have no concern beyond getting their own needs met at church, and

business meetings are things to be avoided only if they involve gather­

ings of members who show no signs of being regenerate. But those who

love Christ and are in a covenant relationship with a local body should

be eager to gather, pray, seek God's face together, and vote to seek God's

guidance for the body. Pastors and leaders should train their people to

be able to handle such a responsibility in a competent and godly manner,

and the participation of members should benefit the leaders, in giving

confirmation to what they have felt was the Lord's will, or giving them a

check, to rethink what they thought. As well, participation should benefit

the members, as it is one means of both living out their covenant commit­

ment and strengthening their sense of personal connection to the life and

health of the body.

One consequence of the ever lowering age at which Baptist churches

are administering believer's baptism has been to raise the question of

an age limitation for voting members. As we argued above, baptism has

been seen as the doorway into church membership; church membership

includes the privilege/responsibility of participation in congregational

governance. That caused no problems in earlier times when baptism was

17
usually delayed until the teenage years. But today baptisms of preteens

and younger children and admission of them into church membership

with the responsibility of voting has seemed contrary to common sense.

Some churches have begun separating baptism and membership, such

that baptism does not lead to membership for those under a certain age.

Another option is separating members from voting members ( with voting

members defined as members of a certain minimum age, such as sixteen

or eighteen), to avoid the awkward situation of having children vote on

matters they are clearly not able to understand. Perhaps a better way would

be to delay baptism until children have sufficient maturity to assure that

they are making a credible profession of faith; children of such age should

be able to understand the issues before the church, at least on a very basic

level, and they could begin to learn to seek God's face with the body and

begin to take on the full responsibilities of membership.

17. Mark Dever gives a lengthy list of nineteenth- and early-twentieth-century Baptists who were

baptized in their late teens or early twenties, including the two sons of C. H. Spurgeon, whom he

baptized when they were eighteen. Dever, "The Church;' in A Theology for the Church, revised

edition, ed. Daniel Akin (Nashville: B & H, 2 0 1 4 ) , 662-63, n. 1 7 1 .

MEANINGFUL CHURCH MEMBERSHIP 183

Some Practical Matters ofMembership

A very practical but necessary question to ask is what process a

church should follow in receiving a new member. Most Baptist churches

conclude their services with an invitation to place faith in Christ and to

join the church. The difficulty is in being able to ascertain immediately if a

person responding to the invitation does in fact meet the requirements for

membership. Too many churches attempt to do so, and will conclude their

services by a call to vote on receiving those who responded to the invita­

tion, either to receive them as candidates for baptism, or to receive them as

members (via "transfer of letter" or "statement of faith"). The call for a vote

is a meaningless relic of a time past when members took receiving a new

member as a serious matter, carrying with it covenantal responsibilities

for the spiritual welfare of the one joining. But with the loss of emphasis

on regenerate church membership, welcoming new members became a

rubber stamp. Little was expected of new church members, and there was

little sense of responsibility to or for them on the part of existing church

members. What would be a better process?

For those who do respond to the invitation and request membership,

by all means welcome them warmly, but it should be understood up front

that coming forward during the invitation is not the end of the process,

but the beginning. Thus, the meaningless vote is not necessary. Simply

state something like, "Please come forward after the service and welcome

these who will be beginning the process toward church membership:'

After indicating their desire to join there must be some method to

discover if they meet the qualifications. The method many churches are

adopting is called a new members' or new converts' class. In such a class,

the first topic should be a review of what it means to savingly trust Christ.

This should involve all applicants for membership, for some who seek

to come via transfer of letter may come from churches where the gospel

was not clearly taught. So important is this first step that some churches

include a personal conversation with a pastor or deacon, to ensure that

18
every new member is a genuine believer.

For those who are new believers, the class may be a bit longer, involv­

ing preparation for baptism. But all could profit from instruction on the

18. See the twelve-step process recommended by Mark Dever and practiced at his church (Dever,

"The Practical Issues of Church Membership;' in Hammett and Merkle, eds., Those Who Must

Give an Account, 9 6 - 1 0 1 .
184 CHAPTER 7

basic disciplines of the Christian life, and all would need instruction in

the specifics of the church's beliefs and practices. Finally, all should be

acquainted with the church's covenant, and asked if they can commit to

walking in fellowship with the body.

Following the completion of the class, prospective new members

would be presented to the church body ( during a normal business or

members meeting would be the most appropriate time). For new converts,

the one who led the class could recommend that the church vote to baptize

the candidate, stating that the candidate has made a credible profession

of faith and understands what it means to be a follower of Christ. On the

basis of this type of recommendation, the church could make a respon­

sible vote. Following baptism and the signing of the church covenant, the

candidate would become a full member of the church. For those previ­

ously baptized and transferring their membership from another church,

there would again be a recommendation from one who could vouch for

the authenticity of the candidate's faith. As the candidate signed the cove­

nant, the church would vote to receive them. Such a vote is not like votes

in a political election, but more like saying "I do" in a wedding ceremony.

And as a wedding is a mutual commitment, so should a new member cere­

mony be. The new member must affirm the covenant in some way ( orally

or by signing), and the church must affirm their part of the covenant, to

receive this one as a new member and care for them as a family should.

Another practical matter is the question of when is it right to leave a

church. With the serious type of covenantal commitment that is involved

in church membership, what would be proper grounds for breaking

such a commitment? It must be more than mere convenience or a minor

disagreement. I think there would be one of three reasons in most cases:

( 1 ) geographical move (our membership should be where we live); (2) call

to minister in another place ( we may leave one church when we believe

God calls us to minister elsewhere); (3) such a serious problem in one's

present church that one cannot be an effective agent for change, but can

only be damaged by the situation (moral failures, doctrinal problems,

toxic spiritual atmosphere). A good test question to assess the seriousness

of a problem is to ask if you could in good conscience bring a new Chris­

tian or a non-Christian to your church. If the answer is no, you probably

shouldn't bring yourself or your family there either.

A final question is being raised by some who are finding some nonbe­

lievers who want to be involved in a local church's ministries. Some have

MEANINGFUL CHURCH MEMBERSHIP 185

discovered that in our postmodern context, some want to belong before

they believe, because they are more convinced of the reality of Christ by
19
the genuineness of our fellowship than by our rational apologetics. We

would certainly want nonbelieving friends to attend worship, hear God's

word, and experience fellowship with believers, perhaps even join a small

group. They may even serve in some aspects of a church's ministry, but

care would be needed here. They should not be asked to do anything that

makes them an official representative of the church, that involves them

in Christian instruction, or gives them leadership in Christian worship

(even playing an instrument in a praise band). And, while we want to be

welcoming, we would need to ask them to refrain from participating in

some things that are members only (voting and communion particularly),

and graciously explain why. Otherwise, we devalue both the privileges and

responsibilities of membership.

CONCLUSION

As argued in an earlier chapter, I think recovery of regenerate church

membership is the most urgent priority for Baptist churches today. Only

then could membership be meaningful membership, the type we have been

considering in this chapter. Not only would it make possible a responsible

practice of congregationalism, it would be a huge step toward the church

becoming the radiant bride of Christ that is its destiny (Eph. 5 : 2 5 - 2 7 ) .

19. Ed Stetzer says, "With few exceptions, people come to Christ after they have journeyed with

other Christians-examining them and considering their claims" (Ed Stetzer and David

Putnam, Breaking the Missional Code [Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2006), 124.
 C H A P T E R 8

ELDERS IN BAPTIST LIFE

Leaders, Not Rulers

A BAPTIST PERSPECTIVE ON CHURCH LEADERS

AN EMPHASIS ON CONGREGATIONAL government should not be inter­

preted as a denial or denigration of the crucial role church leaders play in

the life and health of a church. One of Paul's first steps in the churches he

founded was to provide for leaders (Acts 1 4 : 2 3 ; Titus 1 : 5 ) . Scripture gives

specific examples, directions, and qualifications for those who are to lead

churches, and practical experience verifies their importance. No church

can be healthy with poor leaders.

The first leaders of the New Testament churches were the apostles. They,

along with prophets, evangelists, and pastor-teachers, are mentioned in

Ephesians 4: 1 1 - 1 2 as those given by Christ to the church to equip the saints

to do the work of ministry. Indeed, the first element listed in the account of

the life of the early church is devotion «to the apostles, teaching" (Acts 2:42).

But apostles, prophets, and evangelists are not generally recognized as offices
1
pertaining to the local church. There is almost nothing in terms of instruc-

1. There have been some, most noticeably Michael Frost and Alan Hirsch, who have seen five offices

187
188 CHAPTERS

tions or qualifications for them, as there are for elders and deacons, and they

are not mentioned as officers of any local churches in the New Testament.

Apostles and prophets are most commonly seen as extraordinary

ministries, serving an important foundational purpose (Eph. 2 : 2 0 ) , but

are not intended to be ongoing offices in the church. After Acts 6, the

original twelve apostles begin to fade into the background. In the council

described in Acts 1 5 , they do not hand down a decision, but act in concert

with the elders and the whole assembly (v. 2 2 ) . Some see missionaries

today as serving an apostolic function, but that is quite different than a

local church office. Some varieties of polity ground the authority of bish­

ops in a supposed succession from the apostles, but there is no evidence in

the New Testament that the apostles ordained, appointed, or envisioned

successors. Indeed, when one of the twelve, James, is martyred (Acts 1 2 : 1 -

2 ) , there is no move to replace him. It seems the early church recognized

2
the apostolic office as a passing one.

There were numerous prophets associated with the New Testament

churches, but none were seen as officers of any particular church. Prophets

in the New Testament were commonly involved in ministries of exhorta­

tion and interpretation of Scripture, and so some today refer to pastors

as prophets and see prophecy as preaching, but few affirm the office of

prophet as normative for local churches today.

The term evangelist occurs only three places in the New Testament

(Acts 2 1 : 8 ; Eph. 4 : 1 1 ; 2 Tim. 4 : 5 ) . Many have exercised such a ministry,

perhaps the most famous being Billy Graham, but it too is not commonly

recognized as an ongoing office in the local church.

Terms such as minister and priest are used to refer to offices of leader­

ship in some churches today, but in the New Testament, they are used to

in Ephesians 4 : 1 1 (apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers), and have championed

what they call the fivefold ministry, or the acrostic APEPT, as the leadership structure essential

for the long-term health of missional churches. See Michael Frost and Alan Hirsch, The Shaping
1
of Things to Come: Innovation and Mission For the 21' -Century Church (Peabody, MA and Erina,

NSW, Australia: Hendrickson, 2003), 1 6 5 - 1 8 1 . But their view is a decidedly minority one and

has a number of weaknesses, the most glaring being the danger of building an entire approach

to church leadership on one verse, to the neglect of many others. See the discussion and critique

in John S. Hammett, "The Church According to Emergent;' in William Henard and Adam

Greenway, eds., Evangelicals Engaging Emergent: A Discussion of the Emergent Church Movement

(Nashville: B & H Academic, 2009), 249-51.

2. See the interesting discussion of the surprisingly small role played by the apostles, especially

the original twelve, in the early Christian movement in Bartchy, "Divine Power, Community,

Formation, and Leadership in the Acts of the Apostles;' in Longenecker, ed., Community

Formation in the Early Church and in the Church Today, 9 8 - 1 0 1 .

ELDERS IN BAPTIST LIFE 189

refer to all believers. First Peter 2:9 calls the church a "royal priesthood;'

and John says Christ has made all his followers "a kingdom and priests"

(Rev. 1 : 6 ) . And while the word minister is used in some groups to refer to

those serving as pastors or elders, in the New Testament it describes the

work to which all Christians are called (Eph. 4 : 1 2 ; 1 Peter 4 : 1 0 ) .

In Baptist life, there have been two categories of those called leaders or

officers in the local church. The first office has been called by a variety of

terms. Scripture most often refers to this office as elder and, less frequently,

overseer or bishop. Contemporary Baptists prefer to use the term pastor. The

second office is universally referred to as deacon, but often with divergent

understandings of the proper responsibilities of those occupying that office.

A variety of factors, including the rise of elder rule and the feminist

movement, have occasioned a good deal of discussion concerning the

functions and qualifications of leaders in Baptist life in recent years. Those

controversies, plus the intrinsic importance of leadership, call for a thor­

ough discussion of this topic. This chapter considers the office designated by

the terms elder, overseer, or pastor. Chapter 9 examines the office of deacon.

ELDERS/ OVERSEERS /PASTORS

The Issue of Terminology

As the heading above indicates, we are first faced with the issue of

terminology. What are we to call this office? For many people, the terms

elder (presbyteros) and overseer or bishop (episkopos) carry associations

with presbyterian and episcopal polity, though they were widely used by

3
Baptists in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Today, the term most

often used in Baptist life is pastor (poimen). Is there any importance to

what we call this office?

There is at least some value in understanding how these terms have

been used ( or misused) historically. Despite the strong evidence that the

three are interchangeable terms for one office, there was a movement,

beginning early in the second century, toward the development of what

is called the monarchical bishop as an office separate from and higher

3. See, for example, the interesting resolution passed by the Sandy Creek Baptist Association on

October 24, 1829: "Resolved, That we, as a body, will discontinue, and recommend to the churches

and preachers discontinue, the title of reverend prefixed to a minister's name, and substitute, as a

more scriptural appellation, the title of Elder:' G. W Purefoy, A History of the Sandy Creek Baptist

Association from Its Organization in A.D. 1758 to A.D. 1858 (New York: Sheldon and Co., 1859), 143.
190 CHAPTERS

4
than the office of elder. That pattern endured until the Reformation.

Calvin recognized what many earlier exegetes had seen, that Scripture
5
uses the terms elder and bishop interchangeably. However, Presbyteri­

anism, as it developed, began to distinguish two different types of elders,

based on 1 Timothy 5 : 1 7 . Those called ruling elders were usually laypeo­

ple, involved in the governance of the church but not in the teaching and

preaching of God's Word. There was usually only one teaching elder in

a church, an ordained man, the one chiefly responsible for the minis­

try of teaching, more often called the pastor or minister than teaching

elder. For a time, there was some debate among Baptists as to the valid­

ity of having ruling and teaching elders in the church, but the practice

was never widespread, because it was seen as having a very slender and
6
debatable biblical basis; it virtually disappeared after 1 8 2 0 .

How are these terms used in Scripture? The word elder is used most

often in the Gospels for the Jewish leaders, with whom Jesus often clashed.

They were usually the more mature men ( since elder does mean older) and

were the leaders of synagogues. The term was taken over for the leaders of

the early church, especially the church in Jerusalem. In all, the word elder is

used as a term for a church leader in the New Testament seventeen times,

ten of those times in the book of Acts, with eight of those with reference to
7
the church in Jerusalem. Perhaps it seemed the most natural term for these

early Jewish believers to use for their leaders. Overseer or bishop is found

only four times as a noun with reference to a church office; a verbal form is
8
used once to describe the function an elder serves. Pastor is used as a noun

4. The earliest evidence for this usage is found in the early second-century letters of Ignatius (35-

107) to a variety of churches. See J. H. Strawley, The Epistles of St. Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch

(London: SPCK; New York: Macmillan, 1900). The bishop is seen as the head of the church

in a city, with the elders or presbyters under him. As the office developed, a bishop came to

oversee the congregations in an area called a diocese. Those exercising leadership in a single

congregation came to be called "priests;' which is a contraction of the term presbyter, or elder.

5. Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 2 1 : 1 0 6 0 ( 4.3.8).

6. See the discussion by Greg Wills, "The Church: Baptists and Their Churches in the Eighteenth

and Nineteenth Centuries;' in Dever, ed., Polity, 33-34. Evidence of the debate can be seen in

Samuel Jones, "Treatise of Church Discipline ( 1 8 0 5 ) ; ' in Dever, ed., Polity, 145-46.

7. With reference to the elders of the church in Jerusalem, see Acts 1 1 : 3 0 ; 15:2, 4, 6, 22-23; 16:4;

2 1 : 1 8 ; with reference to elders of other churches, see Acts 14:23; and 20: 1 7 . Elsewhere in the New

Testament, see 1 Timothy 5 : 1 7 , 19; Titus 1 : 5 ; James 5 : 1 4 ; 1 Peter 5 : 1 ; 2 John l; and 3 John 1 . Some

would add 1 Peter 5:5, but others would see the term there as simply referring to an older man.

8. Acts 20:28; Philippians 1 : 1 ; 1 Timothy 3:2; and Titus 1 : 7 . First Peter 2:25 uses episkopos to refer

to Christ. The verb episkopeo is used for the work of an elder in 1 Peter 5:2, and episkope is used

for the office of bishop or overseer in 1 Timothy 3 : 1 .

ELDERS IN BAPTIST LIFE 191

only once for a church office (Eph. 4: 1 1 ), but twice the verbal form is used to

designate the responsibility of an elder (Acts 20:28; 1 Peter 5 : 2 ) . More often,

pastor or shepherd is used to refer to Jesus, the great and chief shepherd of

the sheep (John 1 0 : 1 1 ; Heb. 1 3 : 2 0 ; 1 Peter 2:25; 5:4).

The evidence for the interchangeability of the three terms is seen most

clearly in Acts 20 and 1 Peter 5 . In Acts 20, Paul sends for the elders of the

church at Ephesus (v. 1 7 ) . When they arrive, he says the Holy Spirit has

made them overseers of the flock (v. 28) and he charges them to pastor, or

shepherd the church of God. In 1 Peter 5, Peter addresses the elders (v. 1 ) ,

telling them they are to pastor or shepherd the flock and that they are to

serve as overseers (v. 2 ) . The synonymous use seems obvious and has been

9
widely recognized as such by exegetes. Baptist confessions of faith utilize

all three terms for this church office. Clearly, the term to be used for the

leaders of the church does not seem to have been a major concern of the
10
writers of Scripture. Of greater concern is what they do.

The Role and Responsibility of Elders

There are scattered references to the tasks or responsibilities of elders

throughout the New Testament. The most important texts are Acts 2 0 : 2 8 -

31; Romans 1 2 : 8 ; Ephesians 4:11-16; 1 Thessalonians 5 : 1 2 ; 1 Timothy

3 : 1 - 7 ; 5 : 1 7 ; Titus 1 : 5 - 9 ; Hebrews 1 3 : 7 , 1 7 ; and 1 Peter 5 : 1 - 4 . These texts

describe the four primary responsibilities assigned to this church office.

The first may be called the ministry of the Word. While all Christians

are commanded to teach and admonish one another (Col. 3 : 1 6 ) , those who

are elders are to be especially gifted and responsible for teaching the church.

Acts 2 0 : 3 1 and Titus 1 :9 reflect the charge laid on elders to preserve sound

doctrine; Ephesians 4: 1 1 links the office of pastor with that of teacher; 1

Timothy 3:2 has «able to teach" as one of the elders qualifications; 1 Timo­

thy 5: 1 7 describes certain elders who work at «preaching and teaching;' and

Hebrews 1 3 : 7 identifies leaders as those «who spoke the word of God to

you:' Whether it is called preaching, teaching, prophecy, or exhortation, the

ministry of the elder is emphatically a ministry that includes the communi­

cation of God's Word. It is primarily by means of his preaching and teaching

that the elder exerts the influence of leadership in the congregation.

9. Benjamin Merkle, The Elder and Overseer: One Office in the Early Church, Studies in Biblical

Literature, ed. Hemchand Gossai, vol. 57 (New York: Peter Lang, 2003).

10. For convenience sake, we will use the term elder in the chapter, recognizing that the office to

which the term refers is usually called "pastor" in most Baptist churches.
192 CHAPTERS

Communication of God's Word is also involved in his second area

of responsibility, which is commonly termed pastoral ministry. This is

directly related to the charge laid on elders to shepherd the church (Acts

20:28; 1 Peter 5 : 2 ) . One of the duties of a shepherd is to feed the flock; for

Christians, our food is the Word of God ( 1 Peter 2 : 2 ; Matt. 4 : 4 ) . So the

shepherd must provide his flock with healthy biblical food. Another duty

of the shepherd is to protect the sheep (John 1 0 : 1 1 - 1 3 ) . One danger to

the flock highlighted in the New Testament is the danger of false doctrine

(Acts 2 0 : 2 9 - 3 1 ) . By teaching the truth, the shepherd provides them with

protection. This protection is also spoken of in more general ways as

"watching over" the flock. The word used in Hebrews 1 3 : 1 7 , agrupneii, has

the idea of constant wakefulness or unceasing vigilance. This care would

be expressed concretely in acts like pastoral visitation, personal counsel­

ing, and ministry in times of sickness (see esp. James 5 : 1 4 ) and grief. Shep­

herds who love their sheep notice when their sheep are hurting and seek

to be with them to care for them. Making that pastoral responsibility even

more solemn is the reminder that leaders "must give an account" for those

under their care (Heb. 1 3 : 1 7 ) .

The third area of responsibility assigned to this office is that of oversight

or leadership. This is why the term overseer (episkopos) is appropriate. This

officer gives overall administrative oversight and leadership to the church.

Three other biblical terms seem to be related to this area of responsibility.

In Titus 1 :7, the elder is called to be an oikonomos, or steward of God.

This word was used of the servant in a household who managed affairs on

behalf of the master (Luke 1 2 : 4 2 ) . As it is a position of considerable trust,

the key requirement of a good steward is faithfulness to the master ( 1 Cor.

4 : 2 ) . This responsibility fits well with the ideas of oversight and leadership.

A second term, found in Hebrews 1 3 : 7 , 1 7 , and 24, seems to add a

tone of authority to the leadership pastors are to exercise. It is true that the

individuals involved here are not explicitly described as elders, pastors,

or overseers. The word used for them, a form of the verb hegeomai, is

simply translated "leaders" and can be used for a variety ofleaders, includ­

ing military and political ones. But the work they are described as doing

(speaking the Word of God, watching over the flock) points to them serv­

ing in the role of elders and pastors. The note of authority is found in the

command in verse 1 7 : "Obey your leaders and submit to them" (ssv).

The third term relates to the nature and extent of pastoral or elder

authority. This much disputed question is one of the central differences

ELDERS IN BAPTIST LIFE 193

between presbyterian and congregational polity. The key term in this

11
dispute is the verb prohistemi, which is used six times of church leaders.

It can be used in a variety of senses, from the authoritative leadership one

would exercise in an army, to the idea of assisting or helping, to the idea of

leadership in a family. With reference to church leaders, it seems to carry

12
a very general sense. But the difficulty of determining the nature and

extent of the authority involved can be seen in the various ways the term

has been translated, especially in 1 Timothy 3:4-5 and 5 : 1 7 , the two texts

that most explicitly and directly connect this activity to the elder. The King

James Version, Revised Standard Version, and English Standard Version

see the elders in 1 Timothy 5 : 1 7 as those who "rule" the church, while the

New International Version sees them as those who "direct the affairs" of

the church. But on 1 Timothy 3:4-5, all except the King James Version see

the overseer as the one who is to "manage" or "care for" the church; only

the King James Version uses "rule:'

As mentioned in the discussion of Presbyterian polity in chapter 6, there

are two factors that support seeing pastoral authority as less than govern­

ing. One is the use of the verb epimeleomai in parallel with prohistemi in

1 Timothy 3 : 5 . The former is only used elsewhere in the New Testament

for the actions of the Good Samaritan in taking care of the man attacked

by robbers, action that hardly seems to be what one would call governing.

This parallel usage, in a text from the same epistle, on the same topic, would

seem to question interpreting prohistemi in 1 Timothy 5: 1 7 as governing

authority. The second factor is overall New Testament teaching on the

relationship of church members and leaders. On that topic, we find a deli­

cate tension. On the one hand, church members are called upon to recog­

nize their leaders' authority, submit to them, and obey them ( see 1 Thess.

5 : 1 2 ; Heb. 1 3 : 1 7 ) . As Daniel Akin points out, "this mindset is foreign to

13
our radically autonomous, democratic and egalitarian culture:' On the

other hand, the way leaders exercise their authority in the New Testament

is never dictatorial, but with a humble spirit, open to the input of others,

11. Romans 12:8 does not specifically link it to an office, but speaks of how those who lead should do

so. First Thessalonians 5: 12 is also a general reference. First Timothy 3:4-5 gives the ability to lead

or manage one's family as a qualification for an overseer; 1 Timothy 3 : 1 2 uses it in the same way

as a qualification for a deacon. First Timothy 5: 17 speaks of leading as an activity of the elders.

12. For more information, see L. Coenen, "Bishop, Presbyter, Elder:' in New International Dictionary

of New Testament Theology, 1 : 1 8 8 - 2 0 1 , esp. 189, 193, 197-98 on prohistemi; and B. Reicke,

"prohistemi" in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, 6:700- 703.

13. Daniel Akin, "The Single Elder-Led Church;' in Perspectives on Church Government, 72.
194 CHAPTERS

and seeking to "lead the church into spiritually minded consensus.?" This

pattern fits congregational government with elder leadership. Moreover,

the support for congregational government in the New Testament also

qualifies the nature of pastoral authority. Thus, the leadership exercised

by elders is very important and should be obeyed by the church, though

not uncritically or apart from congregational input. Elder leadership with

congregational government is in keeping with the meaning of prohistemi

15
and the biblical description of the leadership responsibility of the elder.

There is a fourth responsibility of the elder, one that is easily overlooked

because it is so basic, yet it seems to be the responsibility most clearly related

to the qualifications for the office in 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1 . That respon­

sibility is to serve as an example to the flock ( 1 Peter 5 : 3 ) . Leaders are to be

set apart, not just to honor them but to recognize them as setting forth the

pattern of faith and life that the congregation is to emulate (Heb. 1 3 : 7 ) . This

leads naturally into the next topic, the qualifications of an elder.

The Qµalifications of Elders

The qualifications for this office are given primarily in 1 Timothy 3 : 2 - 7

and Titus 1 :6-9, with a much briefer description in 1 Peter 5:2-4. Since

these lists comprise some of the most detailed and pointed teaching on

16
church order in the New Testament, they deserve careful examination.

The first notable aspect of these lists is their ordinariness. As D. A.

Carson notes, "almost every entry is mandated elsewhere of all believers?"

Whatever is involved in being an elder, it is not a calling to a higher standard

of Christian living. How could it, when every Christian is commanded by

Christ to "be perfect" (Matt. 5:48) and when the goal and destiny of every

Christian is Christlikeness (Rom. 8 : 2 9 ) ?

14. D. A. Carson, "Church, Authority in the;' in Elwell, ed., Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, 2 5 1 .

15. I am glad to note a growing movement toward this position among Baptists. While they differ on

the plurality of elders, Mark Dever, Daniel Akin, James R. White, Paige Patterson, and Samuel

Waldron all seem to affirm the compatibility of congregational government and elder leadership.

See Dever, A Display of God's Glory; Akin, "The Single Elder-Led Church"; White, "The Plural

Elder-Led Church;' in Perspectives on Church Government; and Paige Patterson, "Single­

Elder Congregationalism;' in Cowan, ed., Who Runs the Church? and Waldron, "Plural-Elder

Congregationalism;' in Cowan, ed., Who Runs the Church?

16. See also the extensive discussion of these qualifications in Alexander Strauch, Biblical Eldership:

An Urgent Call to Restore Biblical Church Leadership, 3rd ed. (Littleton, CO: Lewis and Roth,

1995), 67-83, 186-203; and Benjamin Merkle, 40 Questions about Elders and Deacons (Grand

Rapids: Kregel, 2008), 109-57.

17. Carson, "Church, Authority in the;' 249 (emphasis in original).

ELDERS IN BAPTIST LIFE 195

But if these character traits are commanded of all Christians, what is

their significance here? The key to understanding the meaning of these

lists of character traits is remembering that one of the responsibilities

ofleaders is to set the example for the flock ( 1 Peter 5 : 3 ) . The character

required to be an elder is the character necessary to be an example to the

flock. Such a person would not need to be perfect (such persons are in

very short supply among fallen humanity) but would need a degree of

maturity and proven character that would enable him to serve as an effec­

tive example, including an example of how to confess and repent when he

does stumble.

Second, it is also striking how different these qualifications are from

modern lists of qualifications for a position. There is no mention of the

need for training or educational requirements, little in the way of skills or

experience or certification. Character is the central issue.

A third aspect that should be noted is that while there are a number

of similar qualifications and some exact parallels between 1 Timothy 3

and Titus 1 , there are also a number of differences between the two lists.

For example, Titus says nothing about the fact that an elder should not be

a recent convert ( 1 Tim. 3 : 6 ) ; Timothy does not include the characteris­

tics of being "upright, holy, and disciplined" (Titus 1 : 8 ) . These differences

imply that Paul was not trying in either list to be exhaustive, but giving a

representative list of character traits an elder should embody. Nonetheless,

while the lists are not intended to be exhaustive, they are fairly compre­

hensive. They cover five major areas.

Moral Qualifications

The first may be called moral qualifications. The person in view in

these lists is a person of integrity and good judgment, free from vices such

as drunkenness, greed, and a quick temper, and one who is worthy of

respect. The initial words in the two major lists, "above reproach" ( 1 Tim.

3:2) and "blameless" (Titus 1 : 6 ) , serve as summaries. For the flock, he

would be a worthy example; for the outside world, he would be someone

who would command their respect.

Marital and Family Qualifications

The second area of qualifications, and perhaps the most controver­

sial, comes in the area of marital and familial qualifications. First Timo­

thy 3 and Titus 1 both say an elder must be "the husband of one wife"
196 CHAPTERS

(ssv), Interpretations of this phrase vary from the idea that'ihe must be

married;' to "he must not be a polygamist;' to "he must not be remarried;'

to "he must not have been divorced':" With the prevalence of divorce in

recent American society ( and sadly, even within Baptist churches), the last

interpretation has become perhaps the most debated interpretation. Some

say that a person who is divorced cannot be considered "blameless" and

cannot qualify as a husband of one wife. Thus divorce disqualifies one

19
from serving as an elder. In some circles, such an interpretation is viewed

as virtually required if one believes in the literal interpretation of the Bible.

Others make a distinction based on the circumstances of the divorce. For

example, if the divorce occurred before conversion, some say, it is wiped

away, because in Christ, the divorced person is a new creation.

All these interpretations, however, overlook the central point of these

lists. The question that should be asked is this, "Can this person serve as

an example to us in the area of marriage and family?" While some would

object that this approach avoids or undermines the literal interpretation of

Scripture, literally, the passage says nothing about divorce at all. Had Paul

wanted to exclude divorced persons, he simply could have said, "he must

not be divorced:' Also, if someone wants to be fully literal, he would have to

conclude that a single person could not qualify as an elder (thus disqualify­

ing Paul and Jesus), nor could a married person with less than two children,

since 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1 both mention the elders relationship with his

children. But no one disqualifies either single persons or those with less than

two children. Further, we do not see the other qualifications in this same

way. No one argues that a person who got drunk once while in college is

permanently disqualified, nor someone who at one time struggled with his

temper. Rather, we interpret these in terms of his present character. Finally,

to those who differentiate preconversion and postconversion divorce, the

issue is not forgiveness, but fitness. All our sins, pre- and postconversion, are

equally forgiven. That's not the issue. Can this person serve as an example in

this crucial area oflife? That is the question."

18. These are the options listed by Gordon Fee, 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus, Good News Commentary

(New York: Harper and Row Publishers, San Francisco, 1984), 43-44. Fee himself advocates a

position close to mine; that is, the elder must be exemplary in marriage and family life.

19. This is the view of Warren Wiersbe, Be Faithful (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1986), 42. John

Piper, Biblical Eldership, interprets the phrase to prohibit remarriage after a divorce. In Piper's

view, divorce per se does not disqualify one; remarriage after divorce does.

20. It seems that the interpretation of this qualification as referring to one's present, exemplary

marital status and not to the issue of previous divorce is gaining ground. It, or something close
ELDERS IN BAPTIST LIFE 197

In practice, such an interpretation would exclude some who have been

married to only one woman and have more than two children, but are

lousy husbands or dads. Perhaps they meet the letter of the lists of quali­

fications, but not the purpose behind the lists. Someone who has recently

been through a divorce would likewise not be in a position to be an exam­

ple to the flock. However, someone who at some time in the past suffered

through a divorce, but in the years since has established a solid track record

as a husband and father would not be automatically disqualified. In terms

of those who are single, or married but with little experience in parenting,

such persons are not automatically disqualified, but limited. They may be

exemplary in all their current family relationships, but if they have no mari­

tal or parental relationships, it is difficult to see how they can be an example

in those areas. Perhaps even more difficult is the question of a man who is

otherwise qualified, but whose children are not noteworthy for their obedi­

ence to him ( 1 Tim. 3:4; Titus 1 : 6 ) . What degree of obedience is required to

meet this qualification? Obviously, Scripture gives no objective standard by

which to measure degrees of obedience. The best solution is to recall again

the purpose of the qualifications: Can this person serve as an example to

the congregation in the area of parenting? If not, it would not be either wise

or loving to place him in a position of leadership over the body. He needs,

rather, to focus his energy on his own family.

Areas of Giftedness

In addition to his role as an example to the flock, an elder also has

teaching and leadership responsibilities. Therefore, there are also some

qualifications in terms of giftedness that are included in the lists. First

Timothy 3:2 says an elder must be «able to teach:' Titus has the same idea

but expresses it in terms of an elders ability to «encourage others by sound

doctrine and refute those who oppose it" (Titus 1 : 9 ) . Together, they imply

that the elder must have some degree of ability or giftedness in the area of

communicating God's Word, and must have an understanding of sound

doctrine. Some elders may have a greater degree of giftedness in teaching

or a greater depth of understanding of doctrine than other elders, but all

elders should be competent in both areas. An elder should also give some

to it, is the view held by Merkle (40 Questions, 128), Strauch (Biblical Eldership, 192-93), and

Allison ( Sojourners and Strangers, 2 1 4 - 1 5 ) . There is also the interesting change of translation of

the key phrase in the NIV. In the 2001 edition, 1 Timothy 3:2 and Titus 1:6 have "the husband of

but one wife:' while the 2 0 1 1 NIV has "faithful to his wife" in both places.
198 CHAPTERS

evidence of giftedness in leadership, revealed in his management of his

own family ( 1 Tim. 3 : 5 ) .

Spiritual Maturity

One of the qualifications, unique to Timothy but implicit in the idea of

an elder, is that of spiritual maturity. In the words of 1 Timothy 3:6, he must

not be «a recent convert" (neophytos). Titus has no similar language, but an

elder would be assumed to be a man of some years, an older man. Again,

Scripture attaches no specific number to this qualification, but it is a quali­

fication that seems to be often overlooked. Most of the prospective pastors I

train as a seminary professor are relatively young men. Many are not recent

converts, having grown up in Christian homes and having been converted

as children. Still, many lack the maturity and judgment that come with age,

and sometimes their inexperience has gotten them into trouble. Since there

is no specific standard, it is hard to determine how young is too young, but

this qualification serves as a warning. It is ideal when a young pastor can

serve as an associate under an experienced pastor for his first few years of

ministry. When that is not possible, young pastors should pursue informal

mentoring relationships with older pastors in their community.

Limited to Males

There is one final qualification pervasively assumed throughout these

lists. It too has become controversial in recent times. These lists assume that

all elders will be males. The nouns, pronouns, articles, and endings on adjec­

tives all point to males as those in mind. An all-male eldership has been the

overwhelming norm in Baptist life, and has recently been officially affirmed
21
by Southern Baptists in The Baptist Faith and Message 2000, but there have

also been some Baptists who have begun to affirm and argue for female

elders. Countless gallons of scholarly ink have been spilled in discussions of

this issue, and a full review of it is beyond the scope of this book's objectives.

Nevertheless, it does pertain directly to the qualifications of elders, and thus

a brief recap of the key issues in this debate is in order.

Two overall perspectives have emerged among evangelical Christians

over the past twenty years or so. One is called egalitarianism. It affirms the

full equality of men and women, and sees the ability to serve in any role open

21. Article 6 of that document states, "While both men and women are gifted for service in the

church, the office of pastor is limited to men as qualified by Scripture:'

ELDERS IN BAPTIST LIFE 199

to men as intrinsic to genuine equality for women, especially roles in the

22
home and church. The other perspective, though sometimes called tradi­

tionalism-or mistakenly, patriarchalism-is properly called complemen­

tarianism. It affirms full equality between men and women, but sees equality

as compatible with differing, complementary roles for men and women in

23
the home and church. When complementarians point to passages such as

the lists in 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1 or other texts relating to differing roles

in the church (such as 1 Tim. 2 : 9 - 1 5 ) or home (Eph. 5:22-33), egalitarians

respond that such texts are culturally conditioned, were addressed to specific

situations, or are, for one of a number of reasons, limited in their application,

such that the limitations placed on the roles open to women in those texts

do not apply today. Complementarians have argued that the passages them­

selves give no hint of limitation, but rather seem to be based on eternally

valid principles going back to the very creation of male and female.

I remain a complementarian because I fail to see any convincing argu­

ment that empties the key texts of their significance. First Timothy 2 : 9 - 1 5

contains some phrases that are difficult, but the phrase prohibiting women

from teaching and exercising authority, occurring as it does immediately

prior to the qualifications for elders whose responsibility it is to teach and

22. Some of the key works enunciating this perspective are Gilbert Bilezikian, Beyond Sex Roles: A

Guide for the Study of Female Roles in the Bible (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1985); Alvera Mickelsen,

ed., Women, Authority and the Bible (Downers Grove, IL: Inter Varsity, 1986); Gretchen Gaebelein

Hull, Equal to Serve: Women and Men in the Church and Home (Old Tappan, NJ: Revell, 1987);

Linda Belleville, Women Leaders and the Church: Three Crucial Questions ( Grand Rapids:

Baker, 2000); Craig Keener, Paul, Women and Wives: Marriage and Womens Ministry in the

Letters of Paul (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1992, rev. with new introduction 2004), and John

Stackhouse, Jr., Finally Feminist: A Pragmatic Christian Understanding of Gender ( Grand Rapids:

Baker Academic, 2005). All these are representative of what is called evangelical feminism. Less

evangelical but foundational to much egalitarian thought, is the important work of Paul Jewett,

Man as Male and Female ( Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975). The works of more radical feminists

are legion. One collection showing their approach is Letty Russell, ed., Feminist Interpretation of

the Bible (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1 9 8 5 ) .

23. The landmark work for this perspective is John Piper and Wayne Grudem, eds., Recovering

Biblical Manhood and Womanhood: A Response to Evangelical Feminism (Wheaton, IL:

Crossway, 1 9 9 1 ) . It includes a comparison of the statement on "Men, Women and Biblical

Equality;' from the egalitarian group, Christians for Biblical Equality, with the Danvers

Statement, the doctrinal statement of the complementarian group, The Council on Biblical

Manhood and Womanhood (see 403-22, 469-72). More recent support is found in the

contributions of Craig Blomberg and Thomas Schreiner to James Beck, ed., Two Views on

Women in Ministry, rev. ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005); Strauch, Biblical Eldership, 5 1 -

66; Merkle, 40 Questions, 1 3 5 - 4 2 ; Allison, Sojourners and Strangers, 223-240; and Andreas

Kostenberger and Thomas Schreiner, eds., Women in the Church: An Interpretation and

Application of 1 Timothy 2:9-15, 3rd ed. (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2 0 1 6 ) .

200 CHAPTERS

exercise authority, seems clearly intended to prohibit women from serving

as elders. Other roles, such as teaching men in Sunday school classes, serv­

ing in various positions on the staff of a local church, and many other roles,

were not a part of New Testament church life and thus are not directly

addressed. The propriety of women serving in such roles is debatable and

depends on the specific job description and the church's understanding of

these roles; what seems clear is the prohibition of women serving as elders.

24
But what seems clear to me does not seem clear at all to others. In fact,

they cannot see why I cannot see that the complementarian position stands

in contradiction to the spirit of Christ and the tendency of the whole New

Testament. When equally earnest Christians, equally seeking to understand

Scripture, come to such opposing convictions, one wonders if there may be

some unrecognized influences affecting the interpretation of Scripture.

One such influence is obviously the feminist movement. It has been

one of the most profoundly important movements of the past hundred

years, affecting the Western world on a variety of issues. Biblical scholarship

does not occur in a vacuum but is fully exposed to the currents of history.

The question is, has the feminist movement been like a light on Scripture,

enabling us to see its true teaching more clearly, without patriarchal or chau­

vinist assumptions, or has the feminist movement been more like a light in

our eyes, blinding us to what has been obvious to past generations?

A curious feature of modern society is our tendency to believe that

newer is better. In terms of history, this means we tend to believe that we

understand things better than our predecessors. Thus, we often underesti­

mate the importance of historical rootedness. This is especially important in

the area of theology. The Holy Spirit's ministry of illuminating the Scriptures

is not a recent development. Thus, I am reluctant to believe that the over­

whelming majority of exegetes and students of Scripture down through the

centuries are wrong. I do not think history or tradition is infallible. I am a

congregationalist, despite the fact that most Christians for centuries were

not. But the burden of proof lies on the historically newer interpretation.

The egalitarian interpretation cannot bear that burden. I think it has been

unduly swayed by the secular spirit of modern, political feminism.

24. For example, Veli-Matti Karkkainen claims that the key texts I see as prohibiting females

serving as elders "have been successfully defeated with reference to lack of authenticity, cultural

conditioning of texts, the occasional nature of prohibitions, translation alternatives, and so

forth'' (Hope and Community, vol. 5, A Constructive Christian Theology for the Pluralistic

World [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2 0 1 7 ] , 419).

ELDERS IN BAPTIST LIFE 201

Another factor, helpfully noted by Stephen Clark in his book, Man and

Woman in Christ, is the changing idea of equality and identity involved in

25
the transition from a traditional to a technological society. Clark argues

that the organizing principle of traditional society was relational. What

determined ones identity were one's relationships; that is, whose daughter

am I, from what clan or tribe do I come, who are my ancestors? People

were valued for things intrinsic to them, for being something as opposed

to doing something. In technological society, the organizing principle is

functional. What determines identity is what one does; that is, I am a

teacher, a doctor, a mechanic. Identity is achieved rather than ascribed.

Value depends on what one can do.

This distinction casts a helpful light on the egalitarian-complementarian

debate. I have noticed in reading both sides that they often seem to be

talking past each other and rarely connecting. The egalitarian side does

not believe that complementarians can really believe in genuine equal­

ity if there is a distinction in the roles open to men and women. This is

rooted in the functional idea of identity. If a woman is denied the chance

to achieve something simply because she is a woman, equality is under­

mined because it is seen in a functional framework. Equality means equal

opportunity to achieve. Those in the complementary camp seem to be

operating with a relational understanding of equality. Men and women

can be equal and yet have different roles, because value and equality is a

matter of being, not doing.

This distinction can also help resolve one difficulty that has troubled

many on both sides of this debate. That difficulty is the question that arises

in the minds of many when they read what seem to be prohibitions against

women serving as elders: Why? It is obvious that there are many gifted

women who are excellent teachers; many are very capable leaders. Why

should they be prohibited from serving as pastors? It seems capricious.

There seem to be two responses to this question. First, we cannot

or should not need to know all the reasons why God commands us to

do as he says. There was no reason why Adam and Eve should not have

eaten of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. The fruit was ripe,

delicious, and desirable. It was within reach. God had created it and

put it there. The only reason for not eating of it was because God had

25. Stephen B. Clark, Man and Woman in Christ (Ann Arbor, Ml: Servant Books, 1980). In what

follows I am drawing from Clark's argument on pp. 467-506.

202 CHAPTERS

commanded them not to do so. Obedience involves trusting, sometimes

without knowing the reason.

However, in this case, there may be reasons why Scripture prohibits

women from serving as pastors, but they are not functional reasons. God

may gift a woman in teaching and leadership, and yet ask her to serve in

a context other than that of an elder, not because of any functional inabil­

ity, but for relational reasons. God may have a purpose for asking males

and females to relate in a certain way. Perhaps those relationships reflect

something of the relationship of the Father and Son ( 1 Cor. 1 1 : 3 ) . Perhaps

they reflect something of God's original intention in creating men and

women (Gen. 2 : 1 8 ; 1 Tim. 2 : 1 3 ) . But these reasons don't make much sense

to us, because they are not functional reasons. Similarly, we all know many

women who seem far more capable of leading their families than their

husbands. Yet one of the purposes why God assigns husbands to be the

head of the family is to illustrate something of the relationship between

Christ and the church (Eph. 5 : 2 3 - 2 4 ) .

If all this is true-that is, that the egalitarian view is undergirded by

a technological, functional view of life, and the complementarian view

is based on a relational view of life-how do we decide which view to

adopt for male-female relationships in the church today? We live in a

world that is clearly dominated by a functional understanding of life,

and while a functional view is perfectly acceptable in some arenas of life,

I believe faithfulness to Scripture requires adopting a relational view in

the church and within the Christian family. God desires his people in

these two areas to show relationships that reflect something of his nature

and his relationship with us.

Scott Bartchy, though writing on a different topic, makes a helpful

observation concerning the society in which the church originated. He

states that there were two primary institutions in the Greco- Roman world

that provided the metaphors for human relationships: politics and kinship.

In the political realm, egalitarianism was a key term, referring to things like

"equal access to vote, positions of public leadership, and the ownership of

property?" In kinship, the key term was patriarchy. But the New Testament,

particularly Luke in the book of Acts, while antipatriarchal was not egalitar­

ian. Bartchy says that the goal of Lukes portrayal of the development of the

church in Acts "was not the creation of an egalitarian community in the

26. Bartchy, "Divine Power, Community, Formation, and Leadership;' 97.

ELDERS IN BAPTIST LIFE 203

political sense, but a well-functioning family in the kinship sense?" Egali­

tarianism is a political term, dealing with equal rights, and is an idea we can

applaud in the political realm. But the church is a different type of entity,

more like a family than a state. Issues of individual or personal rights are

secondary to the health and well-being of the family, and that family may be

healthiest when men and women fill complementary roles.

Therefore, since it seems to be the teaching of Scripture, since it is

the overwhelming view historically speaking, and since it seems to accord

with the relational view of life that the church as a family is called to

exhibit, I affirm a complementarian view of male and female roles. In the

church, that means that the office of elder is limited to males. How far

that limitation extends to other roles not mentioned in Scripture (Sunday

school teacher, youth group leader, minister of music, etc.) is a matter for

debate on which we should be willing to allow a degree of diversity, since

the answer seems to depend in large measure on individual factors such as

the understanding of the role by the individual church, and thus must be

decided on a case-by-case basis.

However, as a complementarian, I recognize that my position is

contrary to the strongly egalitarian current flowing in this country, and

that women have been wrongly oppressed by men throughout history. I

must admit that at times I am not completely comfortable with the tone

and applications made by some of my fellow complementarians. There­

fore, I would urge churches, especially complementarian churches, to

"bend over backward" to encourage and employ women in all the ways

they feel Scripture allows. In other words, if we truly believe that men

and women are equal, and that women and men are gifted, and that only

one role is clearly limited to men, then to make our professions more

than merely words, let them become visible in actions. I think the body

of Christ will be healthier, the ministries of churches will be stronger,

and the complementarian position will not be seen as simply a theologi­

cal justification for oppressing women. Indeed, I would echo the words

of the Danvers Statement:

With half the world's population outside the reach of indigenous evange­

lism; with countless other lost people in those societies that have heard the

gospel; with the stresses and miseries of sickness, malnutrition, homeless-

27. Ibid., 98.

204 CHAPTERS

ness, illiteracy, ignorance, aging, addiction, crime, incarceration, neuroses,

and loneliness, no man or woman who feels a passion from God to make His

grace known in word and deed need ever live without a fulfilling ministry

28
for the glory of Christ and the good of this fallen world ( 1 Cor. 1 2 : 7 - 2 1 ) .

A Divine Call

One final matter in terms of the qualifications of the elder concerns a

qualification that many think is vital, but is not found in any list. It is the

matter of a divine call to ministry. Daniel Akin includes "a call to ministry
29
and aptness to teach'' as among the qualifications for the office of elder,

but only the second is found in the biblical lists. Nonetheless, for many

Baptists, a special divine call is the most important and indispensable

qualification. Commonly, the first question put to a young man seeking

ordination has to do with his conversion and call to ministry. The list of

those emphasizing the importance of a call to ministry includes Baptists

30
like John Dagg, Charles Spurgeon, and W A. Criswell. Most mention

the necessity of an inward call, which Gerald Cowen calls "a profound

conviction that God has chosen one to serve Him in a special way;' and an

outward call, which is corporate confirmation of the individual's convic­

tion, often expressed in ordination, as fellow believers affirm their belief

31
that he is gifted and qualified to serve.

Those who emphasize the necessity of a divine call want to highlight

God's initiative in the lives of those who become pastors and the serious

commitment involved in entering pastoral ministry. Certainly the impor­

tance of pastoral ministry is seen in the extensive qualifications that are given

for the office. Certainly those who are involved in pastoral ministry should

do so with the conviction that they are doing the will of God. But should

doing the will of God not be the goal of every believer, in all areas of life?

While there is no problem in saying that God has called some to pasto­

ral ministry every Christian should see his or her vocation, be it medicine,
32
business, or farming, as a calling from God. A survey of the terms called

28. Danvers Statement on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, 9.

29. Akin, "The Single Elder-Led Church;' 54.

30. See the discussion in Dagg, Manual of Theology, 241-54; and Cowen, Who Rules the Church?

17-32.

31. Cowen, Who Rules the Church? 2 9 - 3 1 .

32. This was involved in Luther's idea of the priesthood of all believers: "It is pure invention that

pope, bishop, priests, and monks are called the spiritual estate while princes, lords, artisans,

and farmers are called the temporal estate . . . . All Christians are truly of the spiritual estate, and
ELDERS IN BAPTIST LIFE 205

and calling in the New Testament finds the overwhelming proportion refer

to a call common to all believers. All believers are "called to belong to Jesus

Christ" and "called to be his holy people" (Rom. 1 : 6 - 7 ; 1 Cor. 1 : 2 ) . Indeed,

the very word church (ekklesia) implies that believers are those called out

by God. Paul exhorts the Ephesian believers to "live a life worthy of the

calling" they had all received. Of the eleven occurrences of the word call­

ing (klesis) in the New Testament, none refer to a special calling of an

individual; all but one (Rom. 1 1 : 2 9 ) seem to refer to a calling issued to all

believers. Furthermore, ministry is not a work reserved for some, but the

responsibility of all. First Peter 4 : 1 0 says all believers are to minister, faith­

fully using whatever gifts they have been given.

If, then, all believers are called to minister, how is a young man to

determine if he is called to pastoral ministry? Jason Allen raises that very

question in a helpful book, Discerning Your Call to Ministry. He suggests

three categories: "called to minister" (which applies to every Christian);

"called to ministry" ( which he applies to ministries that have "a direct

ministerial component"); and "called to the ministry" (which he describes

as "the final formal category, defined in the New Testament in places like
33
Ephesians 4 : 1 1 - 1 6 , 1 Timothy 3 : 1 - 7 , and Titus 1 : 6 - 9 " ) . I would take a

slightly different approach, and combine the first two categories. While

I think I understand what Allen means by vocations that have "a direct

ministerial component;' and recognize that we do see some vocations in

that light, I think it wiser to see anything that God calls one to do as minis­

terial, when done as service (ministry) to him. Then I would call his third

category the call to pastoral ministry, and see it as a subcategory of the call

to ministry, given to all Christians.

Allen then gives ten helpful questions that can guide one in discern­

ing the call the pastoral ministry, the most objective being, in my opinion,

having the requisite character and gifts, and having others affirm one's
34
sense of calling. There should be a subjective aspect of one's call as well,

there is no difference among them except that of office. Paul says in 1 Corinthians 1 2 [ : 1 2 - 1 3 ]

that we are all one body, yet every member has its own work by which it serves the others:'

Martin Luther, "To the Christian Nobility of the German Nation Concerning the Reform of the

Christian Estate;' in A Reformation Reader: Primary Texts with Introductions, ed. Denis Janz

(Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1999), 9 1 .

33. Jason Allen, Discerning Your Call to Ministry: How to Know for Sure and What to Do About It

(Chicago: Moody, 2016), 1 9 - 2 1 .

34. Ibid. The ten questions are given in ten chapters, which form the bulk of the book ( 2 5 - 1 2 9 ) .

I would highlight his second, fourth, and fifth questions: "Does Your Character Meet God's
206 CHAPTERS

what Allen calls "the internal call;' but here is where I have seen many

young people become confused. Some wait for a "Damascus Road-like

experience:' Allen wisely cautions concerning receiving such a dramatic

call, "Some do, but most don't,":" I do believe that God still guides his

people, but I do not think we can insist that his guidance must be the same
36
for all people, or even the same for one individual in all decisions of life.

What about the idea of a calling to full-time vocational ministry?

First, the term full-time might be misleading. Does it not imply that

others are part-time Christians? Should not all Christians do all they do

in obedience to God's will? Does not God call for all of every Christian's

life? Calvin says, "the Lord bids each one of us in all life's actions to look

to his calling:' He adds, "no task will be so sordid and base, provided you

obey your calling in it, that it will not shine and be reckoned very precious

in God's sight?" So all Christians are to obey God's calling in all of life's

activities. All Christians are called to be full-time Christians.

As to the second aspect, vocational ministry, it is certainly valid to

pay pastors ( 1 Tim. 5: 1 7 ) , and pastoral ministry is so important to the life

and health of a church that churches normally seek to pay their pastors

and thus relieve them of working another job to provide for themselves

and their families. But God's calling is always a calling to minister, not to

receive a paycheck. Anyone gifted and called to pastoral ministry should

begin to seek avenues to be involved in teaching and leading, whether they

are paid to do so or not. All Christians are called to minister because they

are gifted, whether paid or not.

Paul provides a good example here. In Acts 1 8 : 3 - 4 , Paul worked as

a tentmaker with Priscilla and Aquila. Apparently he concluded that

doing so, and thus providing for his needs, was the will of God for his

life. It was God's calling for that time in his life. He ministered on every

Sabbath, using his gifts in evangelistic ministry. But when Silas and

Expectations?" "Has God Gifted You to Preach and Teach His Word?" and "Does Your Church

Affirm Your Calling?" ( 1 0 ) .

35. Ibid., 24.

36. For a very useful book presenting and critiquing three different approaches to the perennial

question of how to find God's will, see Douglas Huffman, ed., How Then Should We Choose?

Three Views on God's Will and Decision Making (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2009). I am not sure that

the three views presented (by Henry and Richard Blackaby, Garry Friesen, and Gordon Smith)

are mutually exclusive. God may choose to guide in different manners in different situations and

with different persons.

37. Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 21:724-25 ( 3 . 1 0 . 6 ) .

ELDERS IN BAPTIST LIFE 207

Timothy came from Macedonia (with financial support for Paul), he

gave himself to full-time ministry (Acts 1 8 : 5 ) . He ministered part-time

when he had to and full- time when he could. Those gifted in pastoral

ministry should not wait until a church hires them full-time but should

to seek to exercise their gifts as time and circumstances allow immedi­

ately. If a church recognizes the value of someone's ministry and wants to

provide for him so that he can devote his full time to that ministry, that

is wonderful, but hundreds if not thousands of Baptist churches have

been planted and led by pastors who farmed or taught school or worked

in other ways to provide for their families. Their call to pastoral ministry

was no different from that of those called to serve churches that had the

means to support them. Nor were they being disobedient to their call­

ing in working in other ways to provide for their needs. God's call to all

believers includes a call to provide for their needs. For some, that call is

answered through their calling to pastoral ministry; for others, that call­

ing is answered alongside their calling to pastoral ministry.

In short, while it is useful to speak of a call to full-time vocational

ministry to describe a calling to a type of ministry that normally is of such

value to a local church that they want to enable someone to devote his

full time to it, it is open to misunderstanding and thus may require some

qualification. All Christians are called to minister and to live out God's

calling on their lives full time. For some individuals, their gifts and quali­

fications are recognized by God's people as equipping them for pastoral

ministry. As they seek God's will, they hear his call to that type of ministry.

In most cases, churches will want to enable them to devote their full time

to their ministry. Thus, their call to provide for their needs coincides with

their call to minister. For others, their call to pastoral ministry involves

serving small or new congregations that have no means to support them.

They answer God's call to provide for their needs through other avenues,
38
and answer God's call to minister as their time and circumstances allow.

This discussion of the qualifications of the elder has been long but

necessary. While I am a convinced congregationalist, it is obvious that

churches can be healthy with any pattern of polity, if they have good and

godly leaders. Even more important than the pattern of our polity is the

38. This will also be true of most churches that adopt a plurality of elders. Normally, a number of

them are not paid and are sometimes called "lay elders:' They work other jobs to provide for

themselves and their families, and minister as elders as their time allows.
208 CHAPTERS

character of our leaders. Congregations should ponder these qualifications

carefully, and evaluate candidates for leadership graciously but biblically.

The Number of Elders

We raise the issue of the number of elders because, while most Baptist

churches today have one pastor or elder, some see strong support in Scrip­
39
ture for a plurality of elders. Beyond the fundamental theological ques­

tion of which pattern seems most in keeping with Scripture, the idea of

a plurality of elders raises other practical questions of implementation.

If a church has a plurality of elders, are they all equal? Would they take

turns preaching on Sundays? Would they all be financially supported by

the church? For larger churches with multiple staff members, would all

the members of the pastoral staff be considered eldersr'" All these ques­

tions merit consideration, but the first matter to consider is the teaching

of Scripture on this issue.

When one looks at the verses containing the words elder, overseer, and

pastor, a consistent pattern of plurality emerges. The church in Jerusalem

41
is spoken of eight times in the book of Acts as having elders; the church

at Ephesus had elders (Acts 2 0 : 1 7 ) ; the churches to which James wrote had

elders (James 5 : 1 4 ) , as did the churches to which Peter wrote ( 1 Peter 5 : 1 ) .

Perhaps the strongest support is found in Acts 1 4 : 2 3 : "Paul and Barnabas

appointed elders for them in each church:' Elder is used in the singular

only three times; once in a generic sense ( 1 Tim. 5 : 1 9 ) and twice for an

individual (2 John 1 ; 3 John 1 ) . There is no verse describing anyone as the

elder of a church. Overseer is only used as a term for a church officer four

times. Three times it is used in a generic sense ( 1 Tim. 3 : 1 - 2 ; Titus 1 : 7 ) .

The one place where it refers to the officers of a specific church it is used in

the plural, for the overseers of the church in Philippi (Phil. 1 : 1 ) . The one

place where pastor is used for a church office it is in the plural, though not

referring to a specific church (Eph. 4 : 1 1 ) .

39. Advocates of a plurality of elders include White, "The Plural Elder-Led Church;' 255-96;

Grudem, Systematic Theology, 928-36; According to Greg Wills, the texts reprinted in Polity, ed.

Mark Dever, give ten examples of earlier Baptists who also believe the New Testament churches

practiced plural eldership. See Wills, "The Church;' 34. Dever, Nine Marks of a Healthy Church,

2 1 5 - 1 6 ; Benjamin Merkle, "The Biblical Role of Elders," in Baptist Foundations, 283-89; Allison,

Sojourners and Strangers, 292-95; and Strauch, Biblical Eldership, 35-50.

40. For consideration of such questions, see Andrew Davis, "Practical Issues in Elder Ministry;' in

Baptist Foundations, 291-309; and Merkle, 40 Questions about Elders and Deacons, 1 6 1 - 2 2 3 .

41. See Acts 1 1 : 3 0 ; 15:2, 4, 6, 22-23; 16:4; 2 1 : 1 8 .

ELDERS IN BAPTIST LIFE 209

Moreover, when church leaders are referred to in other ways, the

pattern is the same. The church of the Thessalonians was commanded

"to acknowledge those who work hard among you, who care for you in

the Lord" ( 1 Thess. 5 : 1 2 ) . Clearly the reference is to a group, not to an

individual. Likewise, the letter to the Hebrews refers three times to the

"leaders" of the group to which that letter was sent ( 1 3 : 7 , 1 7 , 2 4 ) . Look­

ing at this evidence, E. C. Dargan states, "It appears to be well-nigh

certain that in the apostolic churches generally there was a plurality of

elders"? John Piper states categorically, "All New Testament churches

had elders,":"

In addition to this strong biblical support, there are also theologi­

cal and practical reasons for plurality in leadership. Theologically, the

doctrine of human depravity warns us against entrusting too much power

or authority to any one individual. Practically, plural leadership would

seem to offer many advantages. Mark Dever says of his experience:

Probably the single most helpful thing to my pastoral ministry among my

church has been the recognition of the other elders. The service of the other

elders along with me has had immense benefits. A plurality of elders should

aid a church by rounding out a pastor's gifts, making up for some of his

defects, supplementing his judgment, and creating support in the congrega­

tion for decisions, leaving leaders less exposed to unjust criticism. Such a

plurality also makes leadership more rooted and permanent, and allows for

more mature continuity. It encourages the church to take more responsibil­

ity for the spiritual growth of its own members and helps make the church

44
less dependent on its employees.

James White sees a plurality of elders as advantageous in fostering matu­

rity as elders learn from each other, in providing a check for the errors

of any one man, in better providing for the full spectrum of needs in a
45
congregation, and as helping in the exercise of discipline. Ben Merkle

notes four advantages of a plurality of elders: Elders can provide account­

ability for one another; they can provide a balance of gifts; they can share

42. Dargan, Ecclesiology, 57.

43. Piper, Biblical Eldership, 6.

44. Dever, A Display of God's Glory, 24.

45. White, "The Plural Elder-Led Church;' 282-83.

210 CHAPTERS

the burdens of ministry; and having a plurality better demonstrates that

46
ministry is not for only a select few.

In view of the strong case for a plurality of elders, how is it that the

great majority of Baptist churches today have one pastor? A variety of

factors are probably involved. First, it should be noted that the single­

elder model has not been universal in Baptist life. In the early nineteenth

century, Samuel [oness "Treatise of Church Discipline" noted several of

47
the advantages of plurality in leadership, and W. B. Johnson, the first

president of the Southern Baptist Convention, argued from Scripture

48
and practical benefits for a plurality of elders in each church. But over

time, the single-pastor model became dominant. It seems likely that the

rapid growth of Baptist churches, from 1 5 0 in 1 7 7 0 to 1 2 , 1 5 0 in 1860,

49
outstripped the supply of qualified men. In some churches, deacons have

taken the role of elders and provide some of the benefits of plurality in

leadership. In fact, many nineteenth-century Baptist churches saw the

pastor and deacons as constituting the church's eldership. so In the twen­

tieth century, the business model entered Baptist life and perhaps condi­

tioned people toward adoption of the single pastor, patterned after the

chief executive officer of the business world. In the absence of an explicit

command in Scripture concerning the number of elders, the single-elder

51
model became dominant.

Perhaps the classic case for the single pastor is that given by A. H.
52
Strong in his influential theology text. Negatively, he begins by noting

that there is no requirement for a plural eldership. The New Testament

nowhere prescribes any number, and the fact that many churches had

plural elders may be due simply to their size. On the positive side, he points

to some indications that some churches had only one pastor. He sees Acts

1 2 : 1 7 ; 1 5 : 1 3 ; 2 1 : 1 8 ; Galatians 1 : 1 9 ; and 2 : 1 2 as indicating that James "was

the pastor or president of the church at Jerusalem, an intimation which

46. Merkle, 40 Questions about Elders and Deacons, 183-87.

47. Samuel Jones, "Treatise of Church Discipline;' in Dever, ed., Polity, 146.

48. W B. Johnson, "The Gospel Developed;' in Dever, ed., Polity, 190-95.

49. These numbers are from Mark Noll, America's God (Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2002),

166.

50. Wills, "The Church;' 34, says such a view was adopted by the Tyger River Baptist Association of

South Carolina in 1835, and reflected the practice of many churches

51. Ben Merkle notes the possible influence of the business model ofleadership, but also suggests three

reasons why so few Baptist churches have a plurality of elders: "Lack of Qualified Men:' "Lack of

Biblical Knowledge;' and "Fear of Change" (40 Questions about Elders and Deacons, 188-91).

52. Strong, Systematic Theology, 9 1 5 - 1 6 . 43.

ELDERS IN BAPTIST LIFE 211

tradition corroborates.?" He further claims that the use of overseer in the

singular in 1 Timothy 3:2 and Titus 1 : 7 supports the idea of a single pastor,

and believes the reference to the "angel of the church" in the seven letters

to the churches in Revelation 2-3 should be interpreted as referring to the

pastor of each church. Finally, Strong claims that plural eldership is natu­

ral and beneficial only in cases where the size of the church requires it.

What can be said in evaluation of Strong's case for the single elder­

pastor? First, he is correct in saying that there is no biblical requirement

for plural elders. Thus, having either a single pastor-elder or a plurality of

elders is not a matter of obedience to a clear command of Scripture, for

there is no such command. A decision on this question is thus a matter of

drawing out the implications of Scripture, and allowing a degree of diver­

54
sity may be advisable. Nonetheless, Strong's arguments for a single pastor

are quite weak. James may have had a certain prominence in the church

at Jerusalem, but that church did have a plurality of elders. The use of

overseer in the singular in 1 Timothy 3:2 and Titus 1 : 7 is clearly generic,

giving the qualifications for any elder. It really has no relevance to the issue

of plurality. As to the angels of the seven churches of Revelation 2-3, it is

barely possible that angelos in these instances refers to a pastor or elder,

but it would be the only place in the New Testament or anywhere else in

Greek where angelos bears that meaning. It is a very unlikely interpreta­

tion. By contrast, the case for a plurality of elders, outlined above, seems

quite strong. In fact, it would be fair to characterize the New Testament as

assuming a plurality of elders. After all, that was the pattern they would

have inherited from synagogues, which employed a council of elders.

Daniel Akin, while acknowledging that it is easier to make the biblical

case for a plurality of elders, nonetheless maintains that a viable case for

the single elder can be made from Scripture. He points to the possibility

of a single elder in house churches and contends that there is a biblical

pattern for "a plurality ofleaders with a senior leader over them?" He also

notes the New Testament emphasis is on the character of leaders, rather

than the number of leaders, and thus there should only be one elder in the

many churches he suspects would have only one qualified man. Finally, he

53. Ibid., 9 1 6 .

54. For example, Akin, "The Single Elder-Led Church;' says he could pastor a single elder-led

church or a church with a plurality of elders or copastors because the New Testament allows

flexibility on this matter (73).

55. Ibid., 66. He sees evidence for this pattern in Exodus 1 8 : 1 9 - 2 2 . 46.
212 CHAPTERS

adds the observation that, in practice, only one can and must lead. Yet, in

the end, Akin concludes that "a plurality of God-called men in leadership,
56
led by a senior pastor/ teacher" is the preferable model.

In a similar fashion, Paige Patterson, while defending the position

called "single-elder congregationalism:' states that the position as he

understands it could also be called "primary-elder congregationalism;'

because he acknowledges that some churches in the New Testament had

57
a plurality of elders, and so may churches today, when necessary. But he

argues strongly that a plurality of elders cannot be mandated because there

is no commandment relating to the number of elders. In the absence of

such a command, he believes we should decide the issue of plurality based

on what we see of leadership patterns elsewhere in Scripture. He says "the

general pattern that emerges in the Bible is that God calls a leader from

among the people:' As he adds later, "it is difficult to find any place where

God called a cornmittee.?" He believes that pattern is substantiated by the

practice of church history and true to "the psychology of leadership;' in

that every human endeavor seems to require a leader. Thus, while many

churches may need more than one elder, one among the elders "should be

the primary leader and preacher-teacher for the flock'?"

For my own part, I think the consistency of the example of a plural­

ity of elders in New Testament churches and the practical benefits that

result from such a plurality constitute a strong recommendation for the

advisability of adopting a plurality of elders in local churches. But I would

not raise that recommendation to the level of a command. That would be

going beyond New Testament teaching. I can imagine at least two situa­

tions in which I would not seek to adopt a plurality of elders, at least not

immediately. The first would be a church where there were no other men

qualified to serve as elders. The pastor's task in such a setting would be to

mentor some who could become qualified. The second situation would be

the more common scenario of a very traditionally minded church. I would

not divide a church over the issue of a plurality of elders. If there was

56. Ibid., 67-73.

57. Paige Patterson, "A Single-Elder Congregationalist's Closing Remarks;' in Cowan, ed., Who Runs

the Church? 283.

58. Patterson, "Single-Elder Congregationalism:' in Cowan, ed., Who Runs the Church? 150, 152.

He sees that pattern in the sole leadership of Moses, the individual judges and prophets, Peter's

leadership among the apostles, the position of James in the church in Jerusalem, and the

"messengers" to the churches in Revelation 2-3.

59. Ibid., 152.

ELDERS IN BAPTIST LIFE 213

significant resistance, I would not push for immediate adoption but would

teach and train the congregation in the hopes that over time the resistance

would lessen. In the meantime, I would be looking for individuals in the

church who fit the qualifications for elder and begin using them as elders,

even without that title. That is, I would solicit their input on various ideas

and seek to involve and mentor them in a variety of areas of ministry. They

could provide some of the benefits of a plurality of elders without incur­

ring the objections some would make to formal adoption of a plurality of

elders. But in other cases, it may be both possible and desirable to move a

church toward an open adoption of a plural leadership. For those consid­

ering moving a church toward a plurality of elders, a number of practical

questions of implementation must be faced."

"Where do I begin" would be a common question for pastors. Perhaps

a prior question would be, "Should I begin?" Transitioning a church

from a traditional practice to a smoothly functioning plural leadership

61
will probably take at least two to three years. A pastor would need to be

convinced of the biblical basis and important practical benefits of such a

change to make the long-term commitment transitioning would require.

It may be wiser for those anticipating a short pastorate or unconvinced

that plural leadership has New Testament sanction and practical value to

not attempt a transition. Even those who are convinced and desire change

would be advised to proceed slowly and build trust among the members of

the congregation initially. For those who decide to proceed with change,

assessment of present practice and policy is a good starting point. Most

Baptist churches have some affirmation of congregational government in

their governing documents ( constitution, bylaws, charter, confession of

faith, etc.), but in practice, many are deacon ruled, staff ruled, or pastor

ruled. In fact, Jeff Noblitt, pastor of First Baptist Church of Muscle Shoals,

Alabama, was moved to transition his church to plural leadership when he

realized the temptations he faced as pastor in a church where the pastor

60. I have been aided in thinking through the issues in transitioning a church to a plural eldership

by a book by Phil A. Newton, Elders in Congregational Life: Rediscovering the Biblical Model for

Church Leadership (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2005). Newton draws upon his own experience and that

of several others with whom he has had contact. John Piper also reflects on the process his church

followed in "Rethinking the Governance Structure at Bethlehem Baptist Church'' (http://www.

desiringgod.org/library/topics/leadership/governance.html, accessed September 24, 2004).

61. John Piper's church took close to four years to adopt plural eldership ( see Piper, Biblical Eldership,

2). Four years also elapsed between Mark Devers installation as pastor of Capitol Hill Baptist

Church and their adoption of elders ( conversation with Mark Dever, September 17, 2004).
214 CHAPTERS

62
was accepted as a virtual dictator. Other churches may be accustomed to

rule by powerful deacons. A wise pastor will identify where he is likely to

encounter problems and opposition at the outset.

The second step is a long-term focus on preaching and teaching. Phil

Newton recommends studying in depth all the major texts on leadership

with the existing church leadership in a context that allows for give and

take, questions, and discussion on how a church can follow biblical guide­

lines. 63 Eventually such teaching must also be presented to the church

body as a whole. Here too there must be opportunities for questions to be

asked and feedback to be received.

Eventually, a specific proposal for changing the leadership structure

of the church would be presented to the church. It would be best for this

proposal to emerge from the existing church leadership and be presented

to the church as a draft for their dialogue, discussion, input, and revi­

sion. Putting proposals in writing would force the church to think through

some issues systematically.

For instance, what would the new leaders be called? Jeff Noblitt

initially called them "Pastor's Council;' to avoid the reaction he feared

would come to the term elders. Eventually, his church came to accept that

term, and biblically, it is the most appropriate term. But far more impor­

tant than their title are their qualifications and responsibilities.

Their qualifications we have discussed at length above. We have also

considered the responsibilities of elders in general, but need to speak

more specifically of the responsibilities of the elders in relationship to the

one called the pastor. Of course, in the Bible a pastor is simply an elder;

the terms are interchangeable. But in practice, most Baptist churches

have one man that does most of the public preaching and teaching and is

known as the pastor. What would these new elders do? Would they take

turns preaching?

We noted above the four responsibilities assigned to elders in the New

Testament: the ministry of the Word, overall leadership of the church,

pastoral ministry, and setting an example. All elders should be qualified

and capable of involvement in all four. One of the qualifications is "able

to teach:' But there are many settings and areas of teaching. If one of the

62. Newton, Elders in Congregational Life, 139.

63. Ibid., 152-59, presents a well-thought-out plan for leading a church in working through the

biblical teaching.
ELDERS IN BAPTIST LIFE 215

elders, the one called the pastor, is especially gifted in preaching and teach­

ing the Word, there is no reason why he should not handle the bulk of the

public preaching and teaching. In fact, it could be argued that 1 Timo­

thy 5 : 1 7 , while not validating a distinction between teaching elders and

ruling elders, does recognize "a distinction in gifts and function within the

eldership.?" John Piper thinks it "very likely [that] one will be the 'preach­

ing elder' while not excluding others from that responsibility?" Similarly,

if an elder is particularly gifted in administration or visiting the sick, there

is nothing wrong ifhe focuses his efforts in that area. All elders share in all

the responsibilities of the elders, but they need not all share equally in all

these responsibilities.

How do the other elders relate to the one called the pastor? Is he the

senior elder, or the teaching elder? In New Testament terminology, the pastor

is an elder, and all the elders are pastors. In terms of contemporary Baptist

usage, the pastor is the one primarily responsible for the public preaching of

the Word. He is usually paid and thus able to devote his full time to pastoral

ministry. He is also the one most of the church members look to for lead­

ership and ministry. By virtue of his intense involvement, experience, and

giftedness, he may exercise leadership among the elders, but he should not

seek to be the senior elder in the sense of ruling over them, lest he and the

church lose one of the major advantages of a plurality of elders, namely, the

help other mature and godly men give in decision-making and leadership of

the church. The pastor should see himself as one of the elders, accountable

to them and under their corporate authority, even as they as a whole are

under the ultimate authority of the congregation.

Another question could be asked concerning the relationship of the

elders to the other staff members in churches with multiple staff. Are all

staff members elders? Not automatically. Not all the jobs on a modern

church staff require those who would qualify as elders. For example, many

fine youth ministers, Christian education ministers, and music ministers

could perform their ministries well, without necessarily meeting all the

qualifications for elders. However, staff members exercising general pasto­

ral oversight and leadership should probably qualify as elders to hold their

positions. Which staff members function in that way would differ from

church to church and from job description to job description. The other

64. White, "The Plural Elder-Led Church;' 282.

65. Piper, "Rethinking the Governance;' 17.

216 CHAPTERS

staff members, though they may have responsibility for a specific area of

ministry, are accountable first to the elders, as those charged with general

oversight of all the ministries of the church; second, to the congregation as

66
a whole; and, ultimately, to the Lord.

How many elders should a church have? A church should set no fixed

number, but wait to see how many the church recognizes as qualified and

how many are willing to serve. However, the larger the church, the larger

the number of elders it will need to shepherd the flock.

67
Another important issue would be the process for selecting elders.

Scripture gives little explicit help on this matter. Paul and Barnabas

appointed elders in the churches they planted (Acts 1 4 : 2 3 ); Titus was to

appoint elders «in every town" in Crete (Titus 1 : 5 ) . Aside from those two

instances, elders and overseers appear in the churches of Ierusalem, Ephe­

sus, Philippi, and elsewhere with no explanation. However, two biblical

principles would seem to apply. The biblical support for congregational

church government would argue for a role for the congregation in the

process. The biblical teaching on the leadership role for the elders would

support their involvement in and oversight of the process. Below are some

suggestions for a process that incorporates these two biblical principles

and that has been found workable in local church contexts.

Certainly, the pastor would want to preach very carefully on the quali­

fications for elders prior to any selection process. After careful examination

of the qualifications, all members of the congregation would be invited to

pray and submit nominees. Perhaps requiring that such nominations be

accompanied by a rationale explaining how the person nominated meets

the biblical qualifications would be advisable to lessen frivolous nomina­

tions or the idea that such nominations are a popularity contest.

Someone or some group would then have to screen the nominees.

Initially, the screening committee might consist of the pastor and the

deacons, or a special committee chosen for the purpose; later, the existing

elder body would be the obvious choice. This group would receive and

evaluate the nominees, with the pastor, or an elder, giving leadership and

oversight. Some members of the committee may know of circumstances

that would make some nominees ineligible. Those the group considered as

66. See Merkle, 40 Questions about Elders and Deacons, 169-82; and Davis, "Practical Issues in Elder

Ministry': 300-09.

67. See Merkle, 40 Questions about Elders and Deacons, 199-207.

ELDERS IN BAPTIST LIFE 217

at least possibly qualified would be contacted concerning their willingness

to serve. Those willing would then be asked to complete some material,

evaluating their own qualifications. They would be asked doctrinal ques­

tions, indicating their understanding of God, the gospel, the church, and

other basic doctrinal issues. They would be asked to evaluate their own

marriage and family relationships, and other aspects of the qualifications.

The group would review each nominee's responses. All those seen as will­

ing and qualified would be brought before an ordination council. Such

a council is often formed of local pastors but could be formed of a local

church's elders as well. This council would ask further questions relating to

the fitness of the nominees to serve as elders. The council would then issue

a recommendation to the church, in favor of or opposed to ordination.

The names of those nominated and recommended for ordination and

service as elders of the church would then, for the first time, be made

known to the church at large. Those who were initially nominated but not

recommended would never be mentioned publicly. A period of time ( two

to three weeks) would be given for any church member to give a reason to

the committee why a nominee is unqualified and should not be accepted.

The committee would investigate any such charge. If found valid, the

nomination would be withdrawn. If there were no challenge, or any chal­

lenges were found to be invalid, the congregation would be asked to affirm

or reject the nominee. While all prospective leaders should receive a clear

consensus of approval, it would probably be wise to specify a percentage

( e.g., 75 percent of those voting) required for a nominee to be selected.

All those selected would be ordained. This ordination would not

signify that the individual was entering "full-time vocational ministry"

but would be the church's affirmation of his qualifications to serve as elder

and recognition of his entering into ministry as one of their elders. A wise

pastor would also set a priority on training new elders, especially in their

first year or so of service.

A final matter in the selection of elders would be the issue of terms

of service or rotation. By virtue of his character, an elder should always

serve as an example to the flock, but there is no biblical barrier to the

possibility that an elder could take a time apart from active service in the

church leadership. There are pluses and minuses to mandatory rotation

from active service after a set length of time. Some advocate rotation on

the ground that it keeps any one individual from accumulating too much

power, but internal accountability among the elders should prevent that
218 CHAPTERS

occurrence. More cogent is the observation that circumstances in an indi­

vidual's life may change. Family or career responsibilities may change and

affect one's ability to minister as an elder. Provision should be made for

such situations. In opposition to mandatory rotation are the observations

that some elders' skills and abilities in ministry may improve over time,

that we don't force pastors to rotate out of their ministry, and that manda­

tory rotation could mean the replacement of qualified elders by unquali­

fied or less qualified men. John Piper sees the issue of terms of service as

balancing the need to have the most qualified men in positions of leader­

ship with the need «to guard against burn out and stagnation.?" On the

whole, a church should have a provision for rotation of elders, and encour­

age elders to take a sabbatical from active service from time to time, but

leave the final decision on an individual's rotation to the individual in

consultation with the elders.

Finally, there should be a statement in a church's constitution or

bylaws mandating an annual review of the church's leadership structure,

to be done by the elders and reported to the congregation. This would

include matters such as the possible rotation of one or more elders off

active service and the solicitation of nominees for new elders, if needed.

It would also be an appropriate time for reviewing the paid staff of the

church, and considering if further staff need to be added. It would also

provide an opportunity to review the church's policies as to the qualifi­

cations and responsibilities of the elders, to inform new members and

refresh longtime members on these matters.

All these proposals should be incorporated within the church's

governing documents. Since some may believe that a plural elder­

ship implies elder rule, it may be wise to state explicitly that ultimate

authority for church decisions resides in the congregation, acting under

Christ's lordship and headship, and that the authority exercised by the

elders is delegated to them by the congregation and is ultimately subject

to congregational review. It may even be helpful to delineate some of

the specific decisions that are reserved for the congregation ( approval

of budgets, hiring of staff, approval of elders, any decisions affecting the

69
church as a whole) and those that are delegated to the elders. On the

68. Piper, Biblical Eldership, 1 1 .

69. Jonathan Leeman, Don't Fire Your Church Members, 124-31, offers a helpful discussion of how

to decide which decisions should be congregational and which delegated to the elders.
ELDERS IN BAPTIST LIFE 219

whole, though, it would be wise and healthy to keep the congregation

as involved as practically possible, while recognizing the impossibility

of congregational involvement on every minor item. Congregational

involvement would seem to be an incentive to congregational commit­

ment, which is another reason to preserve congregational government

alongside a plurality of leadership.

Moving a church to a plurality of elders could be problematic. It

is still very much a minority view in Baptist life today, and Baptist

churches like change as little as most other churches. There is no biblical

command that requires churches to adopt a plural eldership and thus

there is no problem with a pastor moving slowly on this issue or even

working informally with a group he sees and relates to as elders, even if

they are not recognized as such by the church. Some remain convinced

that the single-elder model has a solid biblical basis or that there should

be a primary elder if a church has a plural eldership. On the whole, the

weight of the biblical evidence supports plural eldership, and the prac­

tical benefits offered by a plurality of elders seem considerable. Thus,

churches should move toward a plural elder model with two conditions:

( 1 ) that the church have men who meet the qualifications for elder, and

(2) that the church be accepting of such a change.

 C H A P T E R 9

THE O F F I C E O F DEACON

Servants of the Church

THE OFFICE OF DEACON HAS been universally accepted among Baptists,

but their understanding of the nature and responsibilities of deacons has

undergone a number of shifts over the years. In some ways, those shifts

have paralleled shifts in the understanding of pastors or elders. Now with

a resurgence of interest in examining the role of elders, the time seems

ripe for a corresponding reconsideration of the role of deacons, especially

in the area of leadership.

THE BIBLICAL BACKGROUND

While deacon is the universal term for this office, the word diakonos

and related terms in the New Testament are much more often translated
1
by terms like servant or minister. The verb diakoneii is found thirty-six

1. It is interesting to note that recent translations like the New International Version or New

American Standard render diakonos and the related terms by "minister" much less often than

the King James Version, perhaps recognizing that "minister" in contemporary English use

connotes more of an ecclesiastical office, whereas diakonos in New Testament use is more a

general word for "servant:'

221
222 CHAPTER9

times in the New Testament, reflecting the same uses of the term as secular

Greek: to wait on someone at a table, to care for someone's basic needs, or

2
to serve in a general sense. The related noun diakonia is usually translated

as service, and diakonos as servant. Only in two texts is the meaning clearly

that of deacon (Phil. 1 : 1 ; 1 Tim. 3 : 8 - 1 3 ) . Most see Acts 6:2-4 as related to

the origin of deacons, and some see Romans 1 6 : 1 as a basis for the office of

deaconess, but that is a matter that will require further examination below.

The major importance of knowing the broader background of diako­

nos is in understanding the role deacons were designed to play. There was

no counterpart to deacons in Judaism, and with the scanty material in the

New Testament, theologians have taken the normal meanings associated

with diakonos as indicating the types of activities appropriate to deacons,

namely, caring for material needs and general serving. Nothing in the

background suggests that it is a role of overall leadership or authority.

THE ORIGIN OF DEACONS

Most see Acts 6 as describing the origin of deacons or, at least, the
3
prototypes of deacons. Though some object that Luke nowhere applies

the term diakonos to the men chosen to coordinate the distribution of

food to widows, there are several good reasons for the traditional view.

First, the related noun diakonia and a form of the verb diakoneii are

found in Acts 6 : 1 - 2 . Second, the qualifications and activities of the men

selected in Acts 6 seem commensurate with the more detailed informa­

tion in 1 Timothy 3 : 8 - 1 3 . Third, if Acts 6 is not linked to the origin of

deacons, we have an office with no precedent in Jewish society, with no

origin described in Scripture, and yet an office that was widely and readily

accepted by New Testament churches. Fourth, there is strong historical

support for this interpretation of Acts 6: "The unbroken tradition of such

writers from Irenaeus onwards is correct in declaring this to be the origin

of the deaconship in the Christian Church."

2. K. Hess, "Serve, Deacon, Worship;' in Brown, ed., New International Dictionary of New Testament

Theology, 3:545.

3. Saucy presents arguments for and against seeing the origin of the office in Acts 6, and concludes

by calling the seven selected in that text as "prototype deacons:' Robert Saucy, The Church in

God's Program (Chicago: Moody, 1972), 154-55.

4. D. Bannerman, The Scripture Doctrine of the Church: Historically and Exegetically Considered

(Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1887), 416-17. I thank Gregg Allison for calling this source to my

attention (Sojourners and Strangers, 241, n. 1 3 3 ) .

THE O F F I C E OF DEACON 223

THE QUALIFICATIONS OF DEACONS

The qualifications of deacons are found principally in 1 Timothy

3:8-13. The seven chosen in Acts 6 were to be "full of the Spirit and

wisdom'' (Acts 6 : 3 ) , and that is consistent with the description in 1 Timo­

thy 3, but the list of qualifications in 1 Timothy 3 is more complete. There

are important similarities and differences between the qualifications for

deacons and those for elders, found in 1 Timothy 3:2-7 and Titus 1 : 5 - 9 .

All three passages portray a dignified man of good reputation. All

three exclude drunkenness and greed. Titus 1 :9 and 1 Timothy 3 : 9 both

have a concern that the individual know sound doctrine. First Timothy

3 requires a degree of maturity for both elder and deacon, though the

requirement is worded differently, with the warning that the elder must

not be a new convert (v. 6 ) , while the deacon must be tested first (v. 1 0 ) .

Titus 1 :6 says an elder must be blameless, a requirement for deacons in

1 Timothy 3 : 1 0 . All three have the same qualification in terms of marriage

("husband of one wife") and a similar requirement in the area of parent­

hood, with 1 Timothy 3 using the same verb, prohistemi, or manage, for

both elder and deacon (see vv. 5, 1 2 ) .

There are also noticeable differences. The list of qualifications for the

deacon is shorter and less detailed than that for the elder. The office of elder

seems to have somewhat more stringent requirements. Also, there are certain

functions associated with the elder that are not associated with the deacon.

The elder must be "able to teach" ( 1 Tim. 3:2) or "encourage others by sound

doctrine and refute those who oppose it" (Titus 1 : 9 ) . The deacon must know

doctrine, but he is not charged with teaching it to the church. This is not to

say that an individual deacon cannot be gifted in teaching; Stephen was one

of the seven and yet may have been a gifted teacher. But the gift of teaching is

not intrinsic to the office of deacon. Also, the office of elder is explicitly linked

with the function of oversight, both in the fact that elder is synonymous with

overseer and in specific phrases identifying the elder as the one who must

"take care of God's church" ( 1 Tim. 3 : 5 ) ; he is the one who "manages God's

household" (Titus 1 : 7 ) . Finally, there is one requirement for deacons that has

no counterpart for elders. It is found in the description in 1 Timothy 3 : 1 1 of

the gynaikas, a much-debated and controverted word that requires separate

discussion. Some see it as referring to deacons' wives and is thus another

qualification for deacons; that is, they must have wives of a certain character.

Others see the word as indicating a third office, that of deaconess. We will

examine the arguments for and against both views shortly.

224 CHAPTER9

THE ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF DEACONS

One reason for considering the qualifications of deacons so carefully

is that they provide a clue to the role and responsibility of deacons. We

have no description in the New Testament of deacons acting as deacons,

with the single exception of Acts 6, which, while controverted, is still

widely used as a model for the ministry of deacons. Aside from that

episode, we have no example of deacons at work. In what follows, we will

draw clues for the role and responsibility of deacons from the associa­

tions that gather around the word diakonos itself, from the description of

the actions of the seven in Acts 6, and by implication from the qualifica­

tions in 1 Timothy 3 .

The associations around the word diakonos we have already mentioned.

The word is closely associated with humble, some would say even menial,

service. That does not make such service unimportant, for even the offer­

ing of a cup of cold water in Christ's name brings reward (Matt. 1 0 : 4 2 ) .

Christian leaders are called upon to exercise leadership in a humble spirit,

and Christian leaders in the New Testament are often referred to servants

(diakonos): Paul (Col. 1 : 2 3 , 2 5 ) , Apollos ( 1 Cor. 3 : 5 ) , Timothy ( 1 Tim. 4 : 6 ) ,

and Jesus, who points to himself as the exemplary servant (Mark 1 0 : 4 3 -

4 5 ) . But it seems likely that deacons are not called to give leadership to

the church in the same way as are elders. If the two offices were identical,

why would two be needed? Diakonos indicates more of a support role than

episkopos or presbyteros.

The example in Acts 6 fits the distinction between the ministry of

leaders (elders/overseers/pastors) and the important but different minis­

try of other servants (deacons). The rationale for the selection of the seven

is given in the apostles' words, "It would not be right for us to neglect

the ministry of the word of God in order to wait on tables" (Acts 6 : 2 ) .

The distribution of food was important; it threatened to divide the early

church. But the apostles could not do everything, and their calling was

"the ministry of the word of God:'

The relationship of the ministries of elders and deacons has been

seen in the same light. The elders are called to the ministry of the Word

of God and to overall leadership of the church, while the deacons are

called upon to deal with the material needs of the people, the care of the

sick and poor, and the temporal affairs of the church in general. These

were the functions assigned to the deacons in the churches that emerged

from the Reformation. Calvin says simply, "The care of the poor was
THE O F F I C E OF DEACON 225

entrusted to the deacons." One of the very earliest Baptist confessions,

the 1 6 1 1 Short Confession o f J o h n Smyth, says that deacons "attend to

the affairs of the poor and sick brethren:' and many other Baptist confes­

sions echo similar ideas.

Another common duty or role of deacons in Baptist life is derived

from the phrase "wait on tables:' Benjamin Keach said, "The Work of

Deacons is to serve Tables, viz. to see to provide for the Lord's Table, the

Minister's Table, and the Poor's Table." The reference to the Lord's Table

indicates that deacons often assisted pastors or elders in the celebration

of the Lord's Supper. R. B. C. Howell, in one of the most influential books

on the diaconate of the nineteenth century, states concerning the duties of

deacons: "The table of the Lord must frequently be spread. The necessary

furniture for the purpose, as well as the elements, must be provided and

superintended." Deacons also assisted in the distribution of the elements,

though leading in the administration of the ordinances was seen as a

responsibility limited to elders. The reference to the minister's table, or the

minister's remuneration, reflects the growing role deacons would have in

the financial affairs of the church in the nineteenth and twentieth centu­

ries. The reference to the Poor's Table indicates the same responsibility

mentioned by Calvin, that the deacons administered the ministry of the

church to the needy. Indeed, Andrew Davis thinks benevolence ministry

"may most closely resonate with the original responsibility of the Seven in

Acts 6;' and thus argues that deacons "can and should be heavily involved

in the benevolence ministry of the church,"

The example in Acts 6 can also be applied in a more general way. The

pastors or elders of the church are given the job of teaching the Word of

God, providing pastoral ministry to the members, and giving overall leader­

ship to the church. That is a job too demanding for any one person, and it

can be challenging even for a body of elders. The deacons are there to assist

the pastors and relieve them of any duties that would prevent them from

doing those things that most require their energy, time, and attention. John

Piper says, "From our study it would seem that the office of deacon exists

to assist the leadership of the church by relieving the elders of distractions

and pressures that would divert them from the ministry of the word and

5. Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 2 1 : 1 0 6 1 (4.3.9).

6. Benjamin Keach, "The Glory of a True Church:' 66.

7. R. B. C. Howell, The Deaconship (Philadelphia: American Baptist Publication Society, 1846), 82.

8. Andrew Davis, "Practical Issues in Deacon Ministry:' in Baptist Foundations, 328.

226 CHAPTER9

prayer and the general, visionary oversight of the church." Those "distrac­

tion and pressures" may vary from church to church. At one church, there

may be so much hospital visitation that pastors have no time to study and

prepare to teach Gods Word. Deacons could assist in that area of minis­

try. In another church it may be an aging building that requires consider­

able maintenance. Deacons could relieve pastors of the need to deal with

those matters. Perhaps one reason why, in the providence of God, we are not

given an explicit job description for deacons is to allow them the flexibility

to serve in a variety of roles that allow the elders to focus on those things

that most utilize their gifts and most match their calling. This is reflected in

descriptions of the deacons, role as caring for the secular or temporal affairs

of the church, so that pastors may be "relieved from secular burdens, and be

left to the spiritual service of the church?"

Gregg Allison urges caution in reading too much of a "tidy division,

of spiritual matters for pastors/ elders and physical and temporal matters

for deacons from the example in Acts 6. From the list of qualifications in

1 Timothy 3 : 8 - 1 3 , which will be considered next, he argues that while teach­

ing, leading, and shepherding seem to be reserved for the pastors or elders,

"all other avenues of service are available to deacons." Perhaps another way

of seeing the ministry assigned to the Seven in Acts 6 ( and deacons today

by extension) could be "leadership over the service-oriented functions of

the church.t" At any rate, it may not be fully accurate to draw from Acts 6

the description of the ministry of deacons as physical or temporal, and the

ministry of elders and pastors as spiritual. Every service offered to Jesus

by a believer and done in the power of the Spirit may be called spiritual

service. But Acts 6 does seem to draw a distinction between the ministry

done by some servants (apostles in Acts 6, pastors/elders today) and the

ministry done by other godly servants, namely, deacons.

Further hints are supplied as to the role and responsibility of the

deacon in the qualifications listed in 1 Timothy 3 : 8 - 1 3 . First, simply the

fact that he is listed alongside the elder with a varying list of qualifica­

tions implies that his duties are different. We noted above that there is no

requirement for an ability to teach, implying that teaching God's Word is

not part of the job of the deacon. Managing God's work or the church is

9. John Piper, "Rethinking the Governance:'

10. Dagg, Manual of Theology, 266.

11. Allison, Sojourners and Strangers, 242-43.

12. Merkle, 40 Questions about Elders and Deacons, 240.

THE O F F I C E OF DEACON 227

not explicitly mentioned, implying that the deacon is not one who exer­

cises oversight of the church as a whole, but he is required to manage his

household well, so the role may involve limited oversight of a particular

area. Not being greedy is mentioned (v. 8 ) , and so the role of the deacon

may have something to do with the finances of the church. That has in fact

been one of the responsibilities consistently associated with the office of

deacon. In early twentieth-century Baptist life, management of business

and financial affairs identified the ministry of most Baptist deacons. A

very popular book on deacons stated, «The business of the church and its

finances constitutes the special and distinct assignment of the deacons.t"

Perhaps this ministry also accounts for the fact that deacons must first

be tested ( v. 1 0 ) , to prove their trustworthiness before handling funds.

His skill in managing his household (v. 1 2 ) would also support the role of

management of the temporal affairs of the church.

But most of the qualifications listed for deacons are similar to those of

elders. This implies that deacons may share at least one of the functions of

elders, that of setting an example of Christlike character. Anyone identified

as an officer of the church in some way represents the church publicly and is

thus required to possess a degree of maturity. It also indicates that the office

of deacon is not a small, unimportant ministry that anyone can fill. Though

it may involve humble service, if it is to be limited to men who are required

to have this type of blameless character, it must be important. Indeed, the

ministry of a deacon can profoundly affect the lives of individuals and the

health of the church, and thus it must be exercised in a Christlike way.

However, these biblical clues have not been the only factors influenc­

ing Baptist perceptions of the role and responsibility of deacons. Howard

Foshee says that in the late 1800s, «the business-world concept of 'board

of directors' was, unfortunately, transferred to the church,"!' With the

board of directors idea, the distinction between the overall leadership

role of the elders and the serving role of the deacons began to blur. In

practice, many deacon boards practiced something close to elder rule.

Perhaps even more commonly, deacons in Baptist churches were «treated

as de facto elders or something between elders and deacons;' especially

15
in smaller, single-pastor churches, or in still other cases, «deacons have

13. P. E. Burroughs, Honoring the Deaconship (Nashville: Sunday School Board of the Southern

Baptist Convention, 1929), 69.

14. Howard Foshee, The Ministry of the Deacon (Nashville: Convention Press, 1968), 32-33.

15. Merkle, "The Office of Deacon:' in Baptist Foundations, 3 1 1 .

228 CHAPTER9

held a position somewhere between simple servants in the church and

a power bloc acting as a 'check and balance, against the authority of the

senior pastor,":" From the very term diakonos, the clues from the minis­

try given to the Seven in Acts 6, and implications from the qualifica­

tions for deacons in 1 Timothy 3 : 8 - 1 3 , it seems clear that deacons should

see their role and responsibility as something other than leadership of

the church. Even one popular approach to deacon ministry, the Deacon

Family Ministry Plan, in which each deacon takes responsibility for some
17
degree of pastoral ministry to a number of families in the church, seems

to run the risk of confusing the roles of pastor and deacon, while point­

ing to the need for a plurality of pastors/ elders, to effectively shepherd

members, in all but the smallest churches.

The best way to clarify the role and responsibility of deacons would be

the establishment of a plural eldership. That would force churches to think

through the relationship of the two offices and would result in a renewal of

the servant aspect of diaconal ministry, with leadership left to the elders.

As to specifics, it seems advisable for churches to follow the pattern of

Acts, in which the roles and responsibilities of deacons are left flexible, to

enable them to address whatever is hindering the ability of the church's

18
elders to accomplish their ministry.

THE NUMBERAND SELECTION OF DEACONS

There is no biblically mandated number of deacons a church should

have, though Gerald Cowen observes that if the church in Jerusalem only

chose seven for a church with several thousand members, by comparison

19
most Baptist churches have too many deacons. Once again, the wisest

16. Davis, "Practical Issues in Deacon Ministry;' 325. The terminology "senior pastor" would suggest

Davis is thinking oflarger churches, those with multiple staff.

17. According to Bruce Grubbs (introduction to Robert Sheffield, The Ministry of Baptist Deacons,

ed. Gary Hardin [Nashville: Convention Press, 1990], 10) by 1990, one-third of Southern Baptist

churches had adopted the Deacon Family Ministry Plan.

18. Merkle suggests facilities, benevolence, finances, ushering and logistics as possible duties for

deacons ( 40 Questions about Elders and Deacons, 241); Davis offers the approach of deacons serving

in teams, each team assigned to one key area of a church's ministry, serving under the oversight of

an elder and reporting to the elders as a whole. The elders would lead in setting the agenda, but

the deacons would be responsible to "make things happen" in their area. He mentions teams for

areas such as "college, corporate worship, encouragement (including bereavement, event support,

hospital visitations, and new births), building and grounds, finances, family and youth, hosting . . . ,

new member assimilation, internationals . . . , men's ministry, women's ministry, missions . . . , senior

adult ministry, and urban outreach" ("Practical Issues in Deacon Ministry:' 327).

19. Cowen, Who Rules the Church? 1 1 4 .

THE O F F I C E OF DEACON 229

course is to specify no number or ratio the church must maintain, but to

be guided by two factors: the needs of the church and the number of quali­

fied candidates, with the second being the more important of the two. A

church can do well with a small number of deacons, but to have unqualified

deacons invites problems. Moreover, there is no need for annual elections

of deacons. Rather, new deacons should be selected as needs arise and as

existing deacons need to withdraw from active service. A mandatory rota­

tion of deacons is not necessary, though deacons should be allowed to step

down without any sense of failure or disqualification if they feel called to

a different area of ministry, simply need to rest, or if the elders feel that a

rotation would be in the best interest of the church and the deacon.

Deacons would be selected, then, only when vacancies arise or new

areas of need are identified. As to the method of selection, Acts 6 points to

congregational action. In a manner similar to that with elders, nominations

could be made by any member, submitting names along with a rationale

showing how the individuals nominated match the biblical qualifications.

This presupposes, of course, that these qualifications have been explained

to the members. As with the elders, there needs to be a body that screens

the names." The best body would be a group of elders. In churches without

elders, the pastor and a couple of the senior deacons would probably be

the best choice. They would examine the names of those nominated, elimi­

nate those who obviously did not meet the qualifications, and talk to the

remaining individuals concerning their willingness, their evaluation of their

fitness, and their sense of call to this ministry. A list of all those found to be

qualified and willing would then be submitted to the congregation.

At this point, many churches make a needless mistake. If they have

more names of qualified and willing candidates than their bylaws or

constitution prescribe, they often ask members to select only some of

the names submitted. For example, suppose a church's bylaws prescribe

four new deacons, but eight qualified and willing applicants are found.

Members are often asked to pick four of the eight. The result is that the

election becomes more of a popularity contest than an affirmation of

20. Davis argues that the elders should be key in this screening process, assuring that candidates

meet the spiritual qualifications given in Scripture. He adds, "This filtering by spiritual criteria

is vital and represents a major difference between the biblical pattern and the traditional 'board

of deacons/church committee' polity:' in which "people are selected based on their skill set and

willingness to serve:' Davis does insist, however, that church vote is necessary and the only way by

which deacons "are empowered to serve in this role" ("Practical Issues in Deacon Ministry,' 326).
230 CHAPTER9

deacon candidates, and those not elected quite often become bitter and

resentful. Rather, the church should vote yes or no for each name and take

the number of deacons approved by the church. If all are qualified, there is

no reason why all should not serve. Few churches have an overabundance

of willing and qualified servants.

DEACONESSES

The final issue we must consider in connection with the office of

deacon is the propriety of the corresponding office of deaconess. This

is a difficult question for several reasons. There are g o o d arguments

on both sides concerning the interpretation of the key texts, there is

evidence on both sides from church history, there are pragmatic issues

pro and con, and one can argue for or against the office based on how

one understands the office of deacon. This is an area of growing diver­

sity among Baptists. I will try to present both sides of the issue and give

the position I feel best fits the evidence, but acknowledge that it is a

complex question.

The decision as to whether women may serve in the office of deacon

( or as deaconesses) depends on the answer given to the questions raised by

three texts. First Timothy 3: 1 1 raises the question as to whether the refer­

ence to gynaikas ( the word for "women") should be seen as the wives of

deacons, or women serving in the office of deaconess. Romans 1 6 : 1 refers

to Phoebe as a diakonos of the church in Cenchreae: Should diakonos be

interpreted in the general sense of "servant;' or is this verse indicating that

Phoebe held the office of deacon ( or deaconess) in the church in Cenchreae?

The third key text is 1 Timothy 2: 1 2 and the question is, does the prohibi­

tion against women teaching and exercising authority over men apply to

what deacons do, or is this prohibition applicable only to the teaching and

exercise of authority done by those in the office of pastor/elder?

The first text to examine is 1 Timothy 3: 1 1 . In the midst of a chapter

devoted to giving the qualifications for church offices, we find a verse list­

ing the qualifications for those simply called gynaikas. The word means

women, but can also be translated wives, and is translated that way in
21
many English translations (KJV, ESV, TEV, HCSB, N r v ) . Within the context

of 1 Timothy 3, however, many feel that it refers to a special group of

women, deaconesses (RSV, NRSV, NAS, NIV 2 0 1 1 ) .

21. It is interesting that the 1984 NIV had "wives" but the 2 0 1 1 "women:'
THE O F F I C E OF DEACON 231

22
There are numerous arguments that can be given for each side. Here

are some of the most common arguments given in favor of seeing the verse

as referring to women who are to serve as deaconesses.

1 . The introductory word hosautos ("In the same way") is used in verse

8 to introduce the qualifications for deacons; it usage in verse 11

suggests the introduction of a new office parallel to deacons.

2. The virtues required in verse 1 1 are very similar to those for deacons,

arguing for a similar office.

3 . The noun gynaikas, while meaning wives in some contexts, has

no modifying adjective (such as "their") to indicate wives, and

Paul could have easily said "wives of deacons" if that had been his

meaning.

4. The lack of any reference in the preceding verses to the wives of

elders makes it unlikely that this verse is referring to the wives of

deacons. Why would the wives of deacons be singled out?

5. At this time there was no feminine form of the word diakonos;

that explains why the verse has gynaikas for females serving in the

diaconal role.

There are also several arguments used to support the idea that

gynaikas here refers to the wives of deacons. Here are some of the most

commonly used.

1 . The singular form of gynaikas, gune, is used for wife in the very next

verse ( 1 Timothy 3 : 1 2 ) , as well as earlier in this passage (verse 2 ) .

Why take it in a different sense in verse 1 1 ?

2. This list of qualifications is much shorter than that for deacons or

overseers, too short for a text introducing a new office.

3. The lack of any qualification referring to marital status and fidelity is

missing in verse 1 1 , but is a qualification for every other office ( elder,

22. Among the sources that give some of the arguments from both sides, see Merkle, 40 Questions

about Elders and Deacons, 249-56; Allison, Sojourners and Strangers, 244-46; William

Mounce, Pastoral Epistles, Word Biblical Commentary, vol. 46 (Nashville: Thomas Nelson,

2000), 202-03; I. Howard Marshall with Philip Towner, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary

on the Pastoral Epistles, International Critical Commentary (London and New York: T & T

Clark, 1 9 9 9 ) , 493-94.
232 CHAPTER9

deacon and even widow). The obvious explanation is that her marital

status is inherent in gynaikas.

4. "Deacons' wives" fits the flow of the passage much better. Qualifica­

tions for a deacon are given in the verses before and after verse 1 1 .

It would seem very strange to interrupt the qualifications for one

office with the qualifications for a different office, then, after only one

verse, to go back to the previous office. If, however, the interpretation

of "wives" is adopted, having a particular type of wife fits as another

deacon qualification, and leads naturally into verse 1 2 .

5. The reason why the wives of deacons are mentioned but not elders

is easily explained by their different roles. The wives of deacons

could easily assist them in their ministries, but the ministry of elders

involved teaching and exercise of authority, activities that seem

prohibited to women in 1 Timothy 2: 1 2 .

While the two sets of arguments seem fairly evenly balanced, I

think the second set is slightly stronger. I think the fourth argument

for deacons' wives, the argument from the flow of the passage, is espe­

cially strong. At the same time, I do not think that such an interpreta­

tion means that women should not serve as deacons, or deaconesses.

That simply is not addressed by this passage. The second important text

is Romans 1 6 : 1 . In that verse, Phoebe is described as "a diakonos of the

church in Cenchreae," Is Phoebe being recognized as holding an office,

deacon or deaconess, or is she simply being commended as a servant?

In favor of the latter are two arguments. The first is that of the twenty­

nine times diakonos is used in the New Testament, it means "servant"

in all but three, or possibly four, times. Moreover, at the time the letter

to the Romans was written, there is no record of any church, with the

possible exception of the church in Jerusalem, that had recognized an

office of diakonos. We find the word used in an official sense in Philippi­

ans 1 : 1 and 1 Timothy 3 : 8 , but both those epistles are later than Romans.

How could Paul be speaking of Phoebe holding an office that was not yet

recognized? On the opposing side, it must be recognized that Paul never

describes someone as being a "servant" of a particular church. Moreover,

the type of service she is described as having rendered fits well with the

type of ministry associated with deacons.

On this question, too, the scales seem fairly evenly balanced, but it

seems that majority opinion is moving in favor of seeing Phoebe in an offi-

THE O F F I C E OF DEACON 233

cial sense, as a deacon. According to Thomas Schreiner, this is the inter­

23
pretation of the majority of modern commentators. At least two recent

Bible versions have adopted the translation "deaconess" in Romans 1 6 : 1

(2011 NIV, NRSV), and some of those arguing for seeing 1 Timothy 3 : 1 1

as referring to deaconesses assume this view of Romans 1 6 : 1 as an argu­

ment for their view of 1 Timothy 3 : 1 1 , so sure are they of their position
24
on Romans 1 6 : 1 . I am not as sure as they are, as the opposing view still

seems to have some strength, but I see the deacon translation as entirely

possible and exegetically defensible.

The third text crucial to the question of women serving as deacons is

1 Timothy 2: 1 2 . In the previous chapter, I argued that the prohibition of

teaching and exercise of authority limits the role of elder to males. Does

the same prohibition apply to the office of deacon? I think not. I think

it very likely that the type of teaching and authority Paul had in mind

in 1 Timothy 2: 1 2 was that which only elders do. Just a few verses after

1 Timothy 2: 1 2 , Paul gives the qualifications of an elder as being able to

teach, and being able to manage is such a way as to "take care of God's

church" ( 1 Tim. 3 : 2 , 5 ) . But there is no qualification requiring deacons to

be able to teach, and while they are required to be good managers of their

household, there is no evidence that their position involved an exercise of

25
authority in the church. Thus, I see no bar to women serving as deacons

from 1 Timothy 2: 1 2 .

In summary, I see no clear affirmation of women serving as deacons

in 1 Timothy 3 : 1 1 . That is one possible interpretation of the verse, but I

see it as slightly less likely than the opposing view, of seeing the wives of

deacons in view. I think there may be a slight tip of the scale to seeing

Phoebe as a deacon in Romans 1 6 : 1 , but even if one sees her as simply a

commended servant, I do not think the absence of affirmative examples

of women serving as deacons in the New Testament amounts to a prohibi-

23. Thomas Schreiner, Romans, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand

Rapids: Baker, 1998), 786-88. An example would be C. E. B. Cranfield, A Critical and Exegetical

Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, 2 vols., International Critical Commentary

(Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1979), 2 : 7 8 1 . While acknowledging the translation of diakonos as

servant as "perhaps just conceivable;' he regards the more official translation as deacon as

"virtually certain,"

24. Marshall refers to Phoebe in Romans 16:1 as "a clear example of a female deacon" and includes

it as an argument for his interpretation of 1 Timothy 3 : 1 1 (The Pastoral Epistles, 494).

25. For an opposing view, see Merkle, 40 Questions about Elders and Deacons, 256-57. He

believes that deacons do exercise authority "in the physical/logistical realm, which would be

inappropriate for women" as a violation of 1 Timothy 2 : 1 2 .

234 CHAPTER9

tion. I do not see the prohibition of 1 Timothy 2: 1 2 as applying to deacons,

and so I feel able to affirm the propriety of women serving as deacons, with

one condition-namely, that there be a clear distinction between the role

of deacon and elder. That is not the case in all Southern Baptist churches,

but for those in which it is, I would have no problem recognizing women

as deacons. At the same time, the model I feel most comfortable affirm­

ing is one in which deacons and their wives are chosen together and serve

together, with a wife of virtue being seen as one of the qualifications for

serving as a deacon.

Historically, the acceptance of women serving as deacons ( or deacon -

esses) has gone up and down. There is some evidence of deaconesses in

the early church. The earliest clear discussion comes from a third-century

document called the Didascalia. But A. G. Martimort argues that "the

ancient institution of deaconesses . . . was encumbered with not a few

ambiguities.?" For the first five centuries, deaconesses were found in only

a limited number of Eastern churches, and not at all in Egypt, Ethio­

27
pia, Rome, Africa, or Spain. Their chief function was "assistance at the

baptism of women, at which, for reasons of propriety, many of the cere­

monies could not be performed by deacons.?" As infant baptism became

increasingly the norm, this function was no longer needed, and deacon -

esses virtually disappeared.

Among Baptists, there has been a mixed appraisal of deaconesses.

The first English Baptist confession of faith, penned primarily by Thomas

Helwys, specifically refers to "Deacons, Men and Women who by their

office releave the necessities off the poore and impotent brethre concern­

29
ing their bodies, Acts 6.1-4:' However, most confessions are silent as

to the gender of deacons. Church records reveal that deaconesses were

not uncommon among early Baptists, but were found mainly among

the General Baptists. The Particular Baptists, by far the larger branch of

30
Baptists, allowed women less active roles.

There were notable advocates of deaconesses among nineteenth­

century Baptists in America. R. B. C. Howell argues that Scripture "autho-

26. A. G. Mortimort, Deaconesses: An Historical Study, trans. K. D. Whitehead (San Francisco:

Ignatius Press, 1986), 250.

27. Ibid., 5-6.

28. F. L. Cross and E. A. Livingstone, eds., "Deaconess;' in Cross and Livingstone, eds., The Oxford

Dictionary of the Christian Church, 3 8 1 .

29. The spelling is that of the original, reproduced in Lumpkin, Baptist Confessions of Paith, 1 2 1 - 2 2 .

30. Leon McBeth, Women in Baptist Life (Nashville: Broadman, 1979), 140.
THE O F F I C E OF DEACON 235

rizes, and in some sense, certainly by implication, enjoins the appointment

of deaconesses in the churches of Christ."! He calls them "female assis­

tants to the deacons;' whose duty it was to minister to females, to help the

sick and helpless, and to assist females in being baptized. He also acknowl­

edged that some churches have failed to appoint deaconesses and that, in

some such cases, women of intelligence and piety have voluntarily under­

taken the necessary duties, becoming "substantially deaconesses;' making

"amends for the want of proper ecclesiastical action?" J. R. Graves, while

Howell's opponent on most issues, agreed with him on this issue, seeing

"no good reason why saintly women should not fill the office of deaconess

today in most churches. In fact, they often perform the duties of the office

without the name.?" A third example comes from First Baptist Church of

Waco, Texas, whose records show that they recognized six deaconesses in

1877, during the pastorate of B. H. Carroll, who was later the founder of
34
Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary.

But such churches were never the norm. Charles W Deweese notes,

"Although deaconesses have existed in every century of Baptist life, the

position has never been widespread.?" Deaconesses began to decline,

especially in the twentieth century as the role of the deacons began to

change from ministry to management. With the business model dominat­

ing church life, most churches hesitated to put women on the "Board of

Directors'?" Churches that did so were viewed as moderate or liberal, for

placing women in positions of leadership was seen as violating 1 Timothy

2 : 1 2 . But today there is something of a revival of interest in deaconesses,

especially among churches that see the eldership as limited to males. They

can utilize deaconesses because they see the role as one of service rather

than leadership. Since John Piper understands the office of deacon to

involve neither teaching nor leading men, he concludes, "It appears then

that the role of deacon is of such a nature that nothing stands in the way
37
of women's full participation in it:' Mark Dever testifies that his church

has felt itself free to recognize deaconesses, because they clearly distin-

31. Howell, Ihe Deaconship, 1 3 1 . 24.

32. Ibid., 134.

33. Graves's statement is found in McBeth, Women in Baptist Life, 142. McBeth's source is an article

in the February 22, 1879 newspaper, The Baptist.

34. McBeth, Women in Baptist Life, 143.

35. Deweese, A Community of Believers, 102.

36. Ibid., 103.

37. Piper, Biblical Eldership.

236 CHAPTER9

guish the deacons from the elders, with the latter assigned responsibility
38
for leadership and limited to males.

What is one to make of this debate? Certainly the contemporary femi­

nist movement has sensitized us to the importance and value of women

being involved in ministry. Indeed, in many churches, women have served

in the role of deaconess without the title. With a majority of American

church members female, the need for females to minister to other women

in many areas is obvious. Moreover, there are considerable historical prec­

edents and, as discussed above, some possible biblical passages to support

the recognition of deaconesses, such that churches cannot be charged with

explicitly violating Scripture if they utilize deaconesses in a serving role.

However, as noted above, the passages cited (Rom. 1 6 : 1 ; 1 Tim. 3 : 1 1 ) are

not clearly pointing to an office of deaconess. First Timothy 3: 1 1 may be

interpreted as teaching that the wives of deacons are part of the qualifica­

tions for the diaconate and will help them in their ministry, particularly

in their ministry to other women. Thus, the need for ministry to women

by women has an obvious group designed to meet that need, the wives

of deacons, whose character qualifies them and their husbands for such
39
ministry. In terms of Phoebe, whether an official deacon or simply a

commended servant, she is like millions who have followed her, who have

served because they were gifted and empowered by the Spirit, and saw

areas where their service was needed. Regardless of whether they have a

formal office and title or not, such godly servants quietly and simply serve.

They deserve the same commendation as Phoebe.

ORDINATION

Baptist churches traditionally ordain their leaders, both elders and

deacons. But why? What does ordination mean and what does it accomplish?

For such a widespread practice, there is a surprisingly sparse biblical basis.

Possible Old Testament precedents include events like the commis­

sioning of Joshua as Moses's successor (Num. 2 7 : 1 8 - 2 3 ) , or the conse­

cration of Aaron and his sons (Exod. 28-29; esp. 2 8 : 4 1 ) and the Levites

(Num. 8 : 5 - 2 2 ) , but none of these are real parallels to contemporary ordi­

nations. There is no suggestion in the New Testament that Moses is in

38. Dever, A Display of God's Glory, 1 3 - 1 4 .

39. I have seen this idea put into practice in a Baptist church we were a part of in Mundelein, Illinois.

Husbands and wives were elected and served very effectively as deacon teams.
THE O F F I C E OF DEACON 237

any way a model or type of a pastor or deacon, and ordination is not seen

as transferring power to lead a nation. As to the consecration of priests,

the New Testament teaches the priesthood of all believers and calls upon

them all to be a set-apart, or holy, people. In the New Testament, there is

no record of anything like a formal ordination of the twelve apostles. They

were simply called and appointed by Christ (Mark 3 : 1 4 ; Luke 6 : 1 2 - 1 3 ) .

The apostles themselves neither ordained nor appointed successors; thus

any theory of ordination as involving apostolic succession or transfer of

apostolic authority is problematic at best. The evidence for something like

ordination is limited to Acts and the Pastoral Epistles.

In Acts 6 : 1 - 6 , we find the closest parallel and clearest basis for ordina­

tion to a church office. If, as argued above, Acts 6 does narrate the origin

of deacons, verse 6 describes their ordination. They were selected by the

congregation and received public recognition, followed by apostolic laying

on of hands. Alan Culpepper notes several similarities between this account

and the commissioning ofJoshua as Mosess successor in Numbers 2 7 : 1 8 -

23. In each case, there is an appointing, a reference to the Spirit, a public

presentation, and a laying on ofhands." However, there is also an important

difference. The seven appointed in Acts 6 were not replacing or succeeding

the apostles, as Joshua was Moses. Rather, the seven who were ordained

were to assist the apostles, as the Levites were to assist Aaron and his sons.

Laying on of hands is also found in Acts 1 3 : 3 , where Paul and Barn­

abas were set apart for the ministry to which God had called them, but

laying on of hands is not mentioned in Acts 14:23 or Titus 1 :5, where

elders are appointed. The word used in Titus 1 : 5 , kathistemi, is used in

Acts 6 : 3 for the appointment of the seven, is found three times in Hebrews

for the appointment or ordination of priests ( 5 : 1 ; 7:28; 8 : 1 ) , and does seem

associated with an official type of appointment. The word used in Acts

1 4 : 2 3 , cheirotoneo, can mean choose or elect by raising hands, raising the

question of congregational involvement. The context seems to indicate

that Paul and Barnabas appointed the elders in this case, but the active

role of the congregation elsewhere in Acts argues for at least "the concur­

rence of the congregations,":" In any case, laying on of hands, which some

see as the "actual act of ordination,"? is not mentioned in these two texts.

40. Alan Culpepper, "The Biblical Basis for Ordination:' Review and Expositor 78, no. 4 ( 1 9 8 1 ) : 478.

41. Richard Longenecker, "The Acts of the Apostles;' in The Expositor's Bible Commentary, ed. Frank

Gaebelein (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1 9 8 1 ) , 9:439.

42. Saucy, The Church in God's Program, 1 6 3 .

238 CHAPTER9

Laying on of hands is mentioned twice in connection with Timo­

thy ( 1 Tim. 4 : 1 4 ; 2 Tim. 1 : 6 ) . It seems that both Paul and the presbytery

laid hands on him, and that act was associated with a gift, perhaps an

empowering of the Spirit for ministry. However, such giving of gifts is

not mentioned in other contexts of ordination, and is not included in the

instructions regarding elders in 1 Timothy 3 or Titus 1 . In any case, it is

not clear if Timothy was ordained as a pastor/elder at all. He may have

been commissioned as Paul and Barnabas were in Acts 1 3 , to a special

ministry, but not to a regular church office. Thus, using the descriptions

regarding the laying of hands on Timothy as a pattern for contemporary

ordinations is problematic. A final reference in 1 Timothy 5:22, warning

Timothy to not be hasty in the laying on of hands, is probably a reference

to ordination of elders, since it is found in a section dealing with elders.

Other references to laying on of hands have to do with conferring of the

Spirit (Acts 8 : 1 7 - 1 8 ; 1 9 : 6 ) , healing (Mark 6:5; Acts 9 : 1 2 , 1 7 ; 2 8 : 8 ) , and

43
blessing (Matt. 1 9 : 1 3 - 1 5 ; Mark 1 0 : 1 6 ) .

Over the course of church history, ordination grew in importance. It

eventually became viewed as a sacrament, conferring grace and the gift of

the Holy Spirit on the recipient. Also, since ordination was asserted to go

back in unbroken succession to the apostles, ordination also conferred on

one a share in the authority Christ granted to the apostles. Thus, as Glenn

Hinson puts it, by virtue of their ordination, "the clergy were thought to

differ essentially and not just functionally from the laity":" This under­

standing of ordination came under sharp attack in the Reformation,

because it contradicted the idea of the priesthood of all believers, it created

45
a false dichotomy between clergy and laity, and it lacked biblical warrant.

43. It is interesting to note that there was once a fairly strong sentiment among some early Baptists

that laying on of hands should be given to all baptized believers. The Philadelphia Baptist

Association adopted the Second London Confession verbatim, but felt compelled to add two

articles. One dealt with singing in worship, and the other with the laying on of hands, which they

referred to as an ordinance of Christ "to be submitted unto by all such persons that are admitted

to partake of the Lord's Supper:' The purpose of this act was for "a farther reception of the graces

of the Spirit, and the influences thereof; to confirm, strengthen, and comfort them in Christ

Jesus:' However, other churches and associations, such as the Charleston Association, often

adopted the Philadelphia Confession, but dropped this article. See the discussion in Lumpkin,

Baptist Confessions of Faith, 348-53.

44. E. Glenn Hinson, "Ordination in Christian History;' Review and Expositor 78, no. 4 ( 1 9 8 1 ) : 485

(emphasis in original).

45. For a recent exposition of the meaning and importance of the doctrine of the priesthood of all

believers, see Uche Anizor and Hank Voss, Representing Christ: A Vision for the Priesthood of All

Believers (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2016).

THE O F F I C E OF DEACON 239

Even so, the idea that the ordained are a special class persists, even

among many evangelical groups, and militates against the biblical idea

that all believers are called to ministry. Raymond Bailey even makes the

following radical suggestion: "Perhaps the doctrine of the priesthood

of believers could best be demonstrated by doing away with ordination

altogether. It may well be that the greater diversity of ministries does not

call for more ordinations but for the abolition of the practice as coun­

ter-productive to the mission of the church in the modern world":" He

suggests that we could observe baptism as the ordination of every believer

for service and thus find a way to affirm all believers in their call to minis­

try. At the same time, he acknowledges that ordination may be too firmly
47
entrenched in our traditional practices to be abandoned.

The most famous Baptist of the late nineteenth century, C. H. Spur­

geon, refused ordination, due to the sacramental understanding common

in England. Yet there is a biblical basis for recognizing leaders in some

way, and a properly understood practice of ordination could serve some

positive purposes.

First and most important, ordination allows a church to affirm the

gifts, character, and calling of those it recognizes as qualified to serve as

elders and deacons. This seems to be something of a biblical principle, that

God confirms individual leading by corporate affirmation. For example, it

wasn't the case that Paul and Barnabas alone heard God's call to go out as

missionaries and went out; they and their church heard that call together

and the body then affirmed that call and sent them out (Acts 13:1-3).

Corporate affirmation, if taken seriously, could be a powerful means of

confirming God's call to ministry in the lives of many prospective pastors

and deacons.

This idea of corporate affirmation leads to two suggestions in the actual

practice of ordination. First, the laying on of hands should not be limited

to those ordained, but open to any member of the congregation. If ordina­

tion is not about communicating sacramental grace, but affirming some­

one's gifts, character, and calling to ministry, what is to prevent any believer

from laying hands on a brother or sister whom he or she can affirm? Such a

practice has biblical precedent (Num. 8 : 1 0 ) , it accords with the meaning of

46. Raymond Bailey, "Multiple Ministries and Ordination;' Review and Expositor 78, no. 4 ( 1 9 8 1 ) :

533.

47. Ibid., 534.

240 CHAPTER9

48
laying on ofhands, and it is in keeping with a congregational understand­

ing of ordination, in which it is the church, not some ordained elite, that

acts to ordain. Second, if ordination is primarily a way to affirm that one has

the gifts, character, and calling requisite for a particular ministry, and if all

believers are called to ministry, then something similar to ordination ought

to be widespread in the church. Since ordination has legal implications and

could cause some misunderstanding if widely practiced because it is associ­

ated largely with pastoral or diaconal ministry, perhaps on these additional

occasions it should not be called ordination. Commissioning, or blessing, or

affirming would all serve the same purpose-to give corporate affirmation

of individual calling. It would also reinforce the idea that all believers are

called to some form of ministry.

A second positive result of a careful practice of ordination would be

that it would allow for appropriate recognition of the church's leaders. Such

recognition seems presupposed by scriptural commands regarding leaders,

who must be recognized if they are to be respected and highly regarded

( 1 Thess. 5: 1 2 - 1 3 ), obeyed (Heb. 1 3 : 17), or called to pray for the sick (James

5:14). R e c o g n i t i o nof leaders fits with the admonition to do all things

49
decently and in order ( 1 Cor. 14:40). It is also fitting to recognize them and

set them apart, not because they are somehow part of an elite class, above

the laity, but because they perform an important ministry in and for the

church, a ministry that merits the support and prayers of the body.

A third positive result of a careful practice of ordination could be the

protection of churches from ill-prepared, unqualified, or heretical pastors.

This could be the result, but the current practice of ordination in many

Baptist churches is so casual that it affords little protection. One proof of

this casual attitude is the fact that no one, at least in my experience, has

ever been denied ordination. Ordination councils are commonly called to

examine a candidate and may question him concerning his call to minis­

try, his character, and doctrine, but the outcome of such a council is never

in doubt. Indeed, often the ordination service is already scheduled to take

place an hour or so after the council meets, presupposing that the ordina-

48. See Culpepper, "The Biblical Basis for Ordination;' 4 8 1 : "The laying on of hands by the church

was primarily a blessing and an expression of prayer for the one being appointed to minister in

that congregation:'

49. Suggestions for the elements to be included in an orderly ordination service can be found in Bill

Leonard, "The Ordination Service in Baptist Churches;' Review and Expositor 78, no. 4 ( 1 9 8 1 ) :

549-61. For an example of an ordination sermon, see John S. Hammett, "Ordination Sermon;'

Proclaim! 32, no. 3 (2002): 39-40.

THE O F F I C E OF DEACON 24 1

tion will proceed. Of course, the responsibility cannot be placed finally

upon the ordination council. After all, they only make a recommendation

to the church. The church is the ordaining body, and thus it is the church

that should make a genuine evaluation of a candidate's character and gifts.

Only then can their affirmation be genuine. But most churches seem

grateful or even proud that they have those in their midst who have been

"called to the ministry," and would sooner casually approve their applica­

tion for ordination than question their calling, character, or doctrine.

Here the topics of parts 2 and 3 of this book come together. Only a

congregation of regenerate members would be able to properly evaluate

a prospective leader; only a congregation that accepts its responsibility as

the governing body of the church would be willing to evaluate prospective

leaders. Under congregational government, churches have little right to

complain about their leaders, for it is the churches that certify their calling,

character, gifts, and doctrine when they ordain them. If they practice ordi­

nation wisely, they will have little cause to complain of their leaders, for

they will have protected themselves from leaders who merit complaints.

Finally, a very pragmatic reason for continuing the practice of ordina­

tion in the United States has to do with the country's legal system. The US

tax code was developed in a time when ordained ministers were seen as

assets to their communities, contributing to the general welfare. Thus, there

are considerable tax advantages made available to ordained ministers. Also,

in some states ordination is required for performing legally valid marriages.

Such pragmatic, legal reasons perhaps would not be sufficient to justify ordi­

nation in and of themselves, but neither are they unimportant or unworthy

of consideration. Thus, the advantages of ordination clearly outweigh the

dangers, as long as its meaning is clearly and carefully explained.

CONCLUSION

These issues surrounding church government have required four

lengthy chapters, and the main points may have gotten lost in the details.

Thus, by way of summary and conclusion, I want to briefly describe what

a church governed in the manner described in these chapters would look

like. It is an idealized description, but it incorporates ideas and practices

that have roots in Scripture and Baptist heritage-ideas and practices that

are being utilized in some Baptist churches today.

A congregationally governed church begins with a congregation of

regenerate members. These members all sign a covenant commitment to

242 CHAPTER9

the church each year, pledging themselves to live, pray, and work for the

welfare of the church. They feel a sense of ownership of the church and

attend business meetings in a prayerful spirit, seeking to play their part in

discerning Gods guidance for their body. They are actively involved, using

their gifts to serve the body and affirming others in their ministries.

This church is led by a group of elders, selected by the congregation after

careful reflection on the biblical qualifications for that office. One ( or more)

of the elders is paid a salary by the church and thus is able to devote his full

time to pastoral ministry. He is called the pastor, but sees himself as one of

the elders, responsible along with the other elders for the overall leader­

ship of the church. However, because he is particularly gifted and trained,

he does most of the public preaching and teaching and handles most of

the day-to-day pastoral and administrative duties. He is grateful, however,

that he has other elders who have been longtime members of the congrega­

tion, are men of character, and are also gifted in the areas of leadership and

teaching. They deliberate with him over the decisions facing the church,

and share with him in shepherding the congregation, with each elder taking

leadership in areas where he feels he has the most to contribute. Some may

share some of the teaching responsibilities; some may focus on pastoral

ministry with the sick and hurting; others may give attention to the financial

health of the church, or the youth or children's ministries, or evangelism. As

a body, they are entrusted by the church with the authority to make most of

the day-to-day decisions regarding individual situations, and they take that

responsibility seriously, devoting time in each of their regular meetings to

prayer over these matters. However, they value the congregations input and

bring matters affecting the congregation at large to the regular church busi­

ness meetings. Such matters would include things like the church's budget,

the addition of paid staff, the selection of elders and deacons, and matters of

church membership and discipline. The leadership of the elders is respected

and generally followed, but there is also a genuine belief that the Lord leads

his church through his people, and so the feedback and contributions of

members are often incorporated in final decisions.

Along with the elders who give overall leadership, the church has

a number of deacons who assist the elders. They make sure the church

buildings and grounds are properly maintained, coordinate many of the

church's ministries, and serve where the church's needs and their gifts

dictate. They are chosen as the church recognizes the need for them and

discerns qualified individuals among their members. Their wives serve

THE O F F I C E OF DEACON 243

alongside them, and indeed, a wife of godly character is one of the qualifi­

cations for selection as a deacon. These wives serve especially in minister­

ing to the women of the congregation, in accordance with their gifts. Some

are especially gifted in counseling; others keep in close contact with shut­

in members of the congregation; still others make sure moms are happy

with the nursery and children's ministries.

Ministry is by no means limited to elders and deacons. All members

are challenged to recognize that they are called to minister, and they are

urged to discover and develop their gifts. The church leaders take the

initiative to recognize and affirm publicly those who are using their gifts

through commissioning services for those going on short- term mission

trips, public recognition and prayer for those who work in the nursery or

with the youth, and encouragement of those with the appropriate gifts and

character to seek ordination.

A church that operates in a fashion similar to this is consistent with

Scripture and offers many advantages. It is not the only possible healthy

model. Many Baptist churches will operate with one pastor/elder and a

traditional board of deacons, and such churches can still be healthy, vital

bodies. In other churches the staff may be the elders; still others may go

beyond the model suggested above to elder rule; some may have deacon­

esses who serve along with deacons. Indeed, there are healthy and vital

Presbyterian, Pentecostal, Methodist, and Lutheran churches with virtu­

ally none of the elements of the model above. God can bless and use

imperfect instruments, for that is all we find on earth. More important

than the model of government is the character of the leaders. Still, some

models are less imperfect than others. The model outlined above incorpo­

rates four principles that reflect faithfulness to biblical teaching, and offer

safeguards to a church's health, especially over the long term.

The first and most important of these principles is congregational

government. Baptist pastors may be attracted to elder rule because it seems

far easier to deal with a group of elders than with a stubborn congregation,

and some verses seem to support a strong authoritative role for the elders.

But elder rule misreads Scripture and is at best shortsighted, for one of the

pastor's goals must be for the members of his congregation to mature spir­

itually. In the end, they are the ones who must give financially to support

the ministry he envisions; they must act if the church is to love and reach

and disciple people as he desires. They are far likelier to give and act on

plans they have had a part in developing. And, if the members are matur-
244 CHAPTER9

ing spiritually, why would a church or its pastors want to cut themselves

off from the wisdom they may contribute? By far the most important goal

of a pastor, and the goal that will contribute most to the long-range health

of a church, is the development of a congregation that is able and willing

to govern itself. In most churches, the development of such a congregation

may be a multiyear project, but wise leaders will nurture such congrega­

tions and lead them to practice congregational government.

A second key principle is a plurality of leadership. This is recom­

mended by the scriptural examples of elders (plural), by the doctrine of

depravity ( which warns against the concentration of power in any one

individual), and by the realities of ministry (no one pastor has the wisdom

and gifts sufficient for leading an entire congregation). This plurality is

best exercised in a body of elders, but where recognition of elders could

divide a congregation, a wise pastor could still develop plural leadership

informally, taking a number of godly men into his confidence, seeking

to involve them in ministering among the congregation, and utilizing

their counsel in making decisions and recommendations to the church.

In some churches, the staff or the deacons virtually serve as elders. Such a

model may work, but too often, the individuals involved are not qualified

for elder-type responsibilities. And if the deacons are serving as elders, the

responsibilities that properly belong to deacons may be neglected.

That leads to the third principle. There need to be two categories oflead­

ers in a church. Some give overall leadership, provide pastoral ministry and

teaching, and set an example of Christian conduct. Another category oflead­

ers also help set an example, but serve in a support ministry, enabling those

charged with overall leadership to focus on overall concerns and not become

enmeshed in specific detailed concerns. Among these support leaders, there

need to be men and women, for more than half of the churchs members are

women and they have some needs best met by other women. Some women

serve in such a capacity, without any title, motivated simply by their love

for Christ and their desire to minister in his name. But the Bible makes

specific provision for women to lead in this way, as the wives of deacons.

Some churches may want to call such women deaconesses, other churches

may choose to not recognize them formally at all. Regardless, the point is that

every church needs women who will minister in such a way to other women.

The final principle involved in healthy church government is not a

specific organizational point but the cultivation of an atmosphere that will

affect every aspect of the churchs organization. That atmosphere to be culti-

THE O F F I C E OF DEACON 245

vated is one of challenge, encouragement, and affirmation in the area of

every member ministry. For the church to be and do all it is called to do and

be, every member needs to be involved in ministry. A healthy church will be

one where individuals hear the challenge to minister, receive the encourage­

ment and equipping they need to minister, and are affirmed in their ministry.

This includes a careful practice of ordination to pastoral ministry, but goes

far beyond just pastoral ministry, just as the churchs ministry extends far

beyond just pastoral ministry. Exactly how far a church's ministry extends

and what it should include is the topic of the next chapter.

STUDY QUESTIONS FOR PART 3

1 . What are the arguments, pro and con, for episcopal, presbyterian,

and congregational church government?

2. Do you agree with Mark Dever's assertion, "The congregation will

have their say"! Do congregations really want to govern themselves?

How important is it to you to have a voice in your church's direction?

3. What are some of the privileges and responsibilities of church

membership? Will how you look upon and live out church member­

ship be affected by your reading of chapter 7?

4. What would be some of the benefits in having a plurality of elders in

a local church? What difficulties might it involve?

5. Write a job description for the office of pastor or elder, drawing upon

the relevant New Testament texts and the discussion in chapter 7.

6. Which of the qualifications for the office of elder do you see as most

important? Do you think churches take these qualifications seriously

when looking for a pastor? Are there members in your congregation

who meet these qualifications and thus could be elders?

7. What roles have you seen deacons exercise in churches? What roles

do you think they should exercise?

8. Does 1 Timothy 3 : 1 1 give a basis for the office of deaconess? Give your

understanding of this verse and its relevance to the office of deacon.

9. Who actually ordains someone to ministry-the ordination council,

those who lay hands on him, or the whole church? What does ordi­

nation mean or signify?

10. How important are all these organizational matters? Do they really

affect a church's health? Would you have any problem joining a church

that practiced presbyterian or episcopal polity? Why or why not?

246 CHAPTER9

BOOKS FOR FURTHER STUDY

Brand, Chad Owen, and R. Stanton Norman, eds. Perspectives on Church

Government: Five Views of Church Polity. Nashville: Broadman &

Holman, 2004. The three major forms of polity are presented here,

along with three congregational models. The chapters on the single

elder-led church by Daniel Akin and the congregation-led church by

James Leo Garrett Jr. are particularly good. Unfortunately, the Presby­

terian and Episcopalian contributors do not make the best cases for

their positions.

Cowan, Steven B., ed. Who Runs the Church? Four Views on Church

Government. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2004. This book is another

in the popular Counterpoint Series, this one giving four approaches

to church government, advocated and critiqued by four able schol­

ars. Peter Toon presents Episcopalianism; L. Roy Taylor, Presbyteri­

anism; Paige Patterson, single-elder congregationalism; and Samuel

Waldron, plural-elder congregationalism.

Dever, Mark, ed. Polity: Biblical Arguments on How to Conduct Church

Life. Washington, DC: Center for Church Reform, 2 0 0 1 . Though cited

previously, this book deserves mention here too, for its ten histori­

cal reprints give examples of historic Baptist teaching on the topics of

this chapter, and the introductory essay by Greg Wills gives a helpful

overview.

Dever, Mark and Jonathan Leeman, eds. Baptist Foundations: Church

Government for an Anti-Institutional Age. Nashville: B & H Academic,

2 0 1 5 . Probably the most complete book on the topics of Part Three,

with chapters on congregationalism, church membership, and elders

and deacons.

Hammett, John and Benjamin Merkle, eds. Those Who Must Give an

Account: A Study of Church Membership and Church Discipline. Nash­

ville: B & H Academic, 2 0 1 2 . Church membership is given consid­

eration from a variety of perspectives (biblical, historical, practical

and missional), along with church discipline, through which a former

member may be regarded as outside a church's membership. Both are

considered from the perspective of pastors, as members are those for

who they must give an account.

Leeman, Jonathan. Don't Fire Your Church Members: The Case for Congre­

gationalism. Nashville: B & H Academic, 2 0 1 6 . The title may be a bit

THE O F F I C E OF DEACON 247

misleading, for not only does Leeman give the most comprehensive

discussion of congregationalism and related issues that I know of, he

also discusses elder leadership and its relationship to congregational

governance.

Merkle, Benjamin. 40 Questions about Elders and Deacons. Grand Rapids:

Kregel, 2008. Merkle has written or contributed to several books

about elders and church leadership. In this book, he focuses mainly on

elders, but includes some helpful chapters on deacons too. The forty­

question format of the book is especially beneficial, as it allows read­

ers to go directly to the questions they are interested in.

Newton, Phil and Matt Schmucker. Elders in the Life of the Church: Redis­

covering the Biblical Model for Church Leadership. Grand Rapids:

Kregel, 2 0 1 4 . This book argues for a plural-elder leadership model,

and more importantly, offers suggestions for how to take a church

through a transition from a traditional single pastor with deacons

model to a plurality-of-elder model, from those who have done so.

"Ordination for Christian Ministry" Review and Expositor, Fall 1981. I

hesitate to list this resource because it will only be available to those

with access to theological libraries, but seven articles in this journal

are devoted to the issue of ordination, treating biblical, theological,

and practical issues. I do not agree with the perspectives of all the

articles, but on the whole, they give helpful information on a topic

rarely treated elsewhere in any depth.

Strauch, Alexander. Biblical Eldership: An Urgent Call to Restore Biblical

Church Leadership. 3rd ed. Littleton, CO: Lewis & Roth, 1 9 9 5 . This

book has been one of the most influential arguments for a plural elder­

ship. It consists mainly of an exposition of all the relevant passages on

elders in the New Testament.

 PART 4

WHAT D O E S THE CHURCH D O ?

 C H A P T E R 1 0

THE MINISTRIES

O F THE CHURCH

Five Crucial Concerns

IN THIS CHAPTER, WE LOOK AT THE church in terms of its visible activities.

1
Theologians differ in the number and names they give for these activities.

Millard Erickson sees four functions as "essential to the spiritual health

and well-being" of the church: evangelism (both local and global), edifi­

cation (which includes fellowship and teaching as means of edification),

2
worship, and social concem. Stanley Grenz speaks of a threefold mandate

of the church: worship, edification, and outreach, all manifesting the

3
church as community. Edmund Clowney describes the church's activities

in terms of service: "The church is called to serve God in three ways: to

1. The term used here, ministries, should be distinguished from the term "mission" and phrase

"mission of the church:' While related, ministries refers to more specific and visible activities a

church undertakes to fulfill its mission. For a discussion of the mission of the church, see Kevin

De Young and Greg Gilbert, What Is the Mission of the Church? (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2 0 1 1 ) ;

Christopher J. H. Wright, The Mission of God's People (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2 0 1 0 ) ; and

Jason Sexton, gen. ed., Four Views on the Church's Mission (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2017)

2. Erickson, Christian Theology, 972-79.

3. Grenz, Theology for the Community of God, 638.

251
252 C H A P T E R 10

serve him directly in worship; to serve the saints in nurture; and to serve
4
the world in witness." John Newport approaches this topic by considering

the purpose of the church ( to express Christ's lordship in the church and

world) and then enumerating nine ways in which the church carries out

that twofold purpose, including worship, service, fellowship, discipline,

organization, edification and education, and proclamation and testimo­

5
ny. In his very popular book, The Purpose Driven Church, Rick Warren

encourages churches to allow their activities, programs, and structure to

be driven by five purposes: worship, ministry, evangelism, fellowship, and

6
discipleship. Gregg Allison uses the same terminology as I do, the minis­

tries of the church," but breaks them down in slightly different categories:

"worship, proclamation, missional endeavors, discipleship . . . member

care" and "the responsibility to engage the world at large;' which he sees

as having "particular application in helping the poor and marginalized."

The approach taken in this chapter has extensive overlap and many

similarities with the approaches of others listed above. I call teaching,

fellowship, worship, service, and evangelism the five ministries of the

church, all serving the overall purpose of glorifying God. I think there are

two distinctive aspects of my approach.

The first is how I link the ministries of the church to the nature of the

church. As I will argue below, I think one mark that distinguishes churches

from parachurch ministries is having all these ministries. In other words,

having these ministries is constituent of a church's being. These five activi­

ties may not exhaust all that a church does, though I think they are fairly

comprehensive categories, but they are all activities that every church

must do. Every church will do some better than others, but I think all five

are biblically mandated.

The second distinctive aspect of my approach is that I think these five

are biblically mandated, not just in New Testament teaching on the church

in general, but are pointed to specifically in one key text on the church,

Acts 2:42-47. While the book of Acts is a narrative, in which everything

described is not necessarily prescribed, there are features in Acts 2:42-47

4. Edmund Clowney, The Church, Contours of Christian Theology (Downers Grove, IL:

InterVarsity, 1995), 1 1 7 (emphasis in original).

5. John Newport, "The Purpose of the Church:' in The People of God: Essays on the Believers'

Church, eds. Paul Basden and David Dockery (Nashville: Broadman, 1 9 9 1 ) , 23-38.

6. Warren, The Purpose Driven Church, 103-6.

7. The title of chapter 12 of Allison's book, Sojourners and Strangers, is "Ministries of the Church'' (413).

8. Ibid., 459.
THE MINISTRIES OF THE CHURCH 253

that justify seeing it as deliberately paradigmatic, or as one commenta­

tor puts it, Acts 2:42-47 is "a thesis paragraph on the state of the early

church." (See Figure 1 0 . 1 for the phrases from this passage that show the

presence of these ministries in the life of the early church.)

By using the term ministries, it should not be thought that these activi­

ties belong in some special way to the officers or leaders of the church. As

mentioned in an earlier chapter, all the members of the church are minis­

ters, and these are ministries of the church.

"They devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching:' The Ministry of Teaching

"They devoted themselves . . . to fellowship . . . . All The Ministry of Fellowship

the believers were together and had everything in

common . . . . They broke bread in their homes and

ate together with glad and sincere hearts:'

"They devoted themselves . . . to the breaking of bread The Ministry of Worship

and to prayer. Everyone was filled with awe . . . . Every

day they continued to meet together in the temple

courts . . . praising God:'

"They sold property and possessions to give to anyone The Ministry of Service

who had need . . . enjoying the favor of all the people:'

"And the Lord added to their number daily those The Ministry of Evangelism

who were being saved:'

Figure 1 0 . 1 : The Ministries of the Church in Acts 2:42-47

THE MINISTRIES OF THE CHURCH

AS A MARK OF THE CHURCH

In chapter 2, we discussed the classical marks of the church ( the church is

"one, holy, catholic, and apostolic") and the Reformation marks of the church

( a true church is marked by the right administration of the sacraments and

the pure preaching of the gospel). Those marks, properly understood, still

have some value today, especially the mark of the preaching of the gospel. In

fact, as Millard Erickson asserts, the gospel lies at the heart of the ministry of

the church." A church that loses the gospel ceases to be a church.

But while those marks may have sufficiently distinguished true churches

from their rivals in the past, the five ministries of the church serve as a

9. Longenecker, "The Acts of the Apostles;' 9:288.

10. Erickson, Christian Theology, 980-86.

254 C H A P T E R 10

helpful mark to distinguish churches from parachurch groups today. Para­

church groups number in the thousands and form one of the most pervasive

features of American Christianity in the post- World War II period. Groups

such as Focus on the Family, Wycliffe Bible Translators, and World Vision

International have staffs numbering in the thousands, with budgets in the

millions of dollars, and are well known to millions of American church

members. And while not rivals of churches, parachurch groups have existed

in some tension with churches." On the side of the churches, the tensions

are often associated with the perception that parachurch organizations take

money and workers away from churches; on the side of the parachurch

groups, the charge is sometimes made that churches are dead and that there

would be no need for parachurch groups if churches did their ministries as

12
they should. A recognition of the ministries of the church as a mark of the

church could be a helpful first step in lessening these tensions.

Basically, the distinction between the church and the parachurch orga­

nization is that of generalist and specialist. The church has an assignment

from God to provide teaching, fellowship, worship, service, and evangelism

to people of all ages, sexes, and races. They cannot just do teaching, or just

do missions, or just work with prisoners, or just work with college students.

A distinguishing mark of the church is its calling to minister in a holistic

way to all types of people. They are generalists. The parachurch has the

luxury of specializing in a particular type of ministry to a selected group

of people. As Rick Warren observes, "most of the parachurch movements

begun in the past forty years tend to specialize in one of the purposes of

the church . . . . I believe it is valid, and even helpful to the church, for para­

church organizations to focus on a single purpose. It allows their emphasis

11. See, for example, the title of the study of this topic by Jerry White, Church and Parachurch:

An Uneasy Marriage (Portland, OR: Multnomah Press, 1983). For a more detailed treatment

of the relationship of church and parachurch, see John Hammett, "Selected Parachurch Groups

and Southern Baptists: An Ecclesiological Debate" (Ph.D. diss., Southern Baptist Theological

Seminary, 1 9 9 1 ) . For two varying assessments of the relationship of church and parachurch, see

Philip Jensen and Tony Payne, "Church/Campus Connections: Model I" and Mark Gauthier,

"Church/Campus Connections: Model 2;· in Telling the Truth: Evangelizing Postmoderns, ed.

D. A. Carson (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2000), 1 9 9 - 2 1 3 . Jensen and Payne think parachurch

groups are churches if they gather to proclaim God's Word to a group of God's people; Gauthier

advocates a partnership between churches and parachurch groups.

12. See the discussions in Wesley Willmer, J. David Schmidt with Martyn Smith, The Prospering

Parachurch: Enlarging the Boundaries of God's Kingdom (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers,

1998), 170-80; and International Commission on Evangelical Cooperation, Cooperating in

World Evangelization: A Handbook on Church/Para-church Relationships, Lausanne Occasional

Paper no. 24 (Wheaton, IL: Lausanne Committee for World Evangelization, 1982).
THE MINISTRIES OF THE CHURCH 255

to have greater impact on the church ?" The church should not envy the

parachurch's ability to specialize nor feel inferior if they cannot do a minis­

try as well as the parachurch group. Specialization does allow a higher

degree of proficiency, but requires a narrower breadth of ministry. A medi­

cal general practitioner is not threatened by the heart specialist. On the

contrary, she is happy to be able to refer a patient with a heart problem to

him. The heart specialist, on the other hand, should not look down on the

general practitioner nor think that he is able to care for all the needs of the

patient. Rather, he should send the patient back to the general practitioner

for ongoing care. Both cooperate for the health of the patient.

This supplies a helpful metaphor for the relationship of church and

parachurch. A pastor need not feel threatened if his men get more excited

about going to a Promise Keepers conference than going to the men's prayer

breakfast; the parachurch group has the benefit of specialization. But neither

should the college students in InterVarsity conclude that their church is dead

and that their InterVarsity meeting is where real spiritual life is found. If that

is so, why are there no senior adults or families with preschoolers there?

No, InterVarsity has the luxury of catering to college students. Churches are

called upon to minister to all types of people with all types of needs. Where

possible, churches should freely take advantage of the specialized services

offered by parachurch groups, and even seek to recognize church members

who work for such groups as extensions of their church's ministry. At the

same time, the church cannot abdicate any ministry to a parachurch group,

for Christ has entrusted it to the church. For their part, parachurch groups

should "understand the primacy of the church in the day-to-day spiritual

14
lives of most Christians" and thus seek to operate as genuine arms of the

church. John Stott has said we may grade parachurch groups on this basis:

"independence of the church is bad, cooperation with the church is better,

service as an arm of the church is best?" The ideal would be for parachurch

16
groups to operate consciously in a servant partnership with churches.

The most important point is that churches must provide these minis­

tries. It is a part of their calling. A church that has no teaching minis-

13. Warren, The Purpose Driven Church, 126.

14. Willmer et al., The Prospering Parachurch, 178.

15. John Stott, "Theological Preamble;' to Cooperating in World Evangelization, 1 3 .

16. For more detail on what such a model would involve, see Hammett, "Selected Parachurch

Groups;' 235-40, or John S. Hammett,"How Church and Parachurch Should Relate: Arguments

for a Servant-Partnership Model;' Missiology: An International Review 28, no. 2 (2000): 199-207.
256 CHAPTER IO

try, or that has no evangelistic impact, or whose members never experi­

ence fellowship, is an unhealthy church, one whose well-being is severely

damaged and whose very being as a church is called into question. Elmer

Towns and Ed Stetzer say, "a church is no longer a true church when it

abandons the functions of a church?"

Moreover, churches are called to provide such ministries to all types of

people. The only qualifications a church can make for membership is regener­

ation and a life lived in conformity with a profession of faith in Christ. Beyond

that, churches are called to welcome all types of people. Students of church

growth tell us that churches grow most rapidly when they attract people who

are like those who are already members. That may well be so, but if it is, it is a

mark of our fallenness, for in Christ, there "is neither Jew nor Greek . . . slave

nor free . . . male nor female" (Gal. 3:28). A distinguishing mark of the church

in the world today must be its openness to all types of believers and its provi­

sion of all the types of ministries it is charged to provide.

THE MINISTRIES OF THE CHURCH

AND THE NATURE OF THE CHURCH

The challenge to provide teaching, fellowship, worship, service, and

evangelism to all types of people is a daunting one, but one that is not in

the least capricious or beyond the ability of churches to meet. In particu­

lar, this section shows how the ministries of the church are inherent in the

nature of the church.

For example, take the ministry of teaching. It is certainly important to

the church. It is required of all elders that they be "able to teach" ( 1 Tim.

3 : 2 ) , and in the one place where the noun pastor is used for a church offi­

cer, it is joined to teacher (Eph. 4 : 1 1 : "pastors and teachers"). Even the

early name for Christians, disciples, means learners or students, and all

Christians are called "to teach and admonish one another" (Col. 3 : 1 6 ) .

How is the ministry of teaching inherently connected to the nature of

the church? It is inherent in the nature of the God to whom the church is

related. The church is the people of God, and that God is the God of truth.

The church is the body of Christ, who is himself "the way, the truth and the

life" (John 1 4 : 6 ) . The church is the temple of the Spirit, who is the Spirit of

truth, given to guide us into all truth ( 1 6 : 1 3 ) . But truth is not self-evident.

17. Towns and Stetzer, Perimeters of Light, 70. They specifically mention preaching and observing

the ordinances as mandatory biblical functions of the church.

THE MINISTRIES OF THE CHURCH 257

Because of the fall, our minds are darkened. The fallen world hates the

truth, and the evil one is the father of lies. Therefore, the church must

provide a ministry of teaching. It is called to be "the pillar and foundation

of the truth" ( 1 Tim. 3 : 1 5 ) . Furthermore, the church must have a teaching

ministry because the church is called into being by the gospel. This gospel

is a message, not an opinion. It has content and provides an outlook on

life, a worldview. Therefore, believers must be taught the message, for that

message is "the power of God that brings salvation' (Rom. 1 : 1 6 ) .

A similar argument can be made for fellowship. The word church

(ekklesia) is used most often in the New Testament, not for an invisible

ideal but for actual gatherings of believers, who meet with each other and

sense that they belong together because God has called them together. The

images for the church underscore the connectedness of the members with

one another. The church is a family, with all the commitment siblings have
18
to one another. The church is the people of God, not his individuals. The

church is the body of Christ, not separated parts. Most of all, the church is

the temple of the Holy Spirit and it is the Spirit who is especially associated

with fellowship. The implication seems to be that fellowship, the Spirit, and

the church belong together, for part of the very nature of the church is that

it is indwelt by the Spirit, whose presence creates fellowship. That is why the

apostolic benediction of 2 Corinthians 1 3 : 14 specifically ascribes fellowship

to the Spirit: "May the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God,

and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all:' Moreover, the "living

stones" that make up the church ( 1 Peter 2:5) are only living stones because

they have been given new life by the Spirit (John 3:5-8; 6:63). The building

composed by these living stones is indwelt by God's Spirit (Eph. 2:20) and

is held together by the Spirit, for he is the Spirit of unity (Eph. 4:3). For the

diverse members of the church to experience fellowship, all that is necessary

is that they live in accordance with their nature as a Spirit-indwelt, Spirit­

19
energized, and Spirit-unified body.

18. According to Joseph Hellerman, in the New Testament world, "the closest same-generation

family relationship was not the one between husband and wife. It was the bond between siblings"

(Hellerman, When the Church Was a Family, 36). To be clear, Hellerman is not saying that this

is a New Testament teaching. The New Testament commands husbands to love their wives as

Christ loved the church (Eph. 5:25). Rather, he is illuminating the significance behind the choice

of the New Testament writers to refer to fellow Christians as "brother" and "sister:'

19. For more on fellowship, see Bruce Milne, We Belong Together: The Meaning of Fellowship

(Downers Grove, IL: Inter Varsity, 1978); Jerry Bridges, True Fellowship: The Practice of Koinonia

(Colorado Springs: NavPress, 1985); and Tod Bolsinger, It Takes a Church to Raise a Christian:
258 CHAPTER IO

Worship is also integrally related to the nature of the church. The

most characteristic thing most churches do is gather for worship. They do

so because they are primarily a divine institution, not a human creation.

Their first allegiance and orientation is to God, and the natural response

to God is worship.

Elements and styles of worship have varied widely over the years and

across cultures. The early church continued worshiping in the temple for

a short time, but soon moved to worship on the first day of the week with

distinctively Christian elements, especially the Lord's Supper. Over the

centuries, the Roman Mass developed into the centerpiece of worship, but

as practiced in the late medieval period, the people became spectators of

the priest more than worshipers of the Lord. Dissatisfaction with worship

was one of the fuels of the Reformation, which led to a renewed emphasis

on the preaching of the Word in worship. The Reformation marks of the

church simply point to the two major aspects of worship: the administra­

tion of the sacraments and the preaching of the Word. The Reformers were

saying a true church is marked by true worship. Today churches around

the world worship in a myriad of ways, but the diversity of practice should

not blind us to the significant fact that all churches worship. It is their

nature as God's people to respond to him in worship.

The close relationship of the church's ministry of service to its nature

is implied in the image of the body of Christ. Because they are followers

of Christ, who "did not come to be served, but to serve" (Mark 10:45), his

people must serve. The first epistle of Iohn sees serving in practical, material

ways as the test of Christian genuineness: "If anyone has material posses­

sions and sees a brother or sister in need but has no pity on them, how can

the love of God be in that person?" ( 1 John 3 : 1 7 ) . This was immediately and

radically true in the New Testament, so much so that many have thought

the early church practiced something like communism. But there was no

economic system or plan; there was just Christian compassion, expressed

in service. And through the centuries, Christians have been disproportion­

ately represented among those who heal the sick, feed the hungry, and serve

the world. They do so because they are moved by Christ's compassion and

because they are Christ's body, his means for serving the world today.

How the Community of God Transforms Lives (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2004). For a more technical

study of the impact of fellowship, see James Samra, Being Conformed to Christ in Community: A

Study of Maturity, Maturation, and the Local Church in the Undisputed Pauline Letters, Library of

New Testament Studies 320 (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 2006).

THE MINISTRIES OF THE CHURCH 259

Finally, the ministry of evangelism is intrinsically related to the

church's nature. There is of course the Great Commission, which mandates

the making of disciples in all nations (Matt. 2 8 : 1 9 - 2 0 ) and thus indicates

that the ministry of evangelism must extend to all cultures. But there is

an even more foundational reason why the church cannot avoid involve­

ment in evangelism. It is that all the other ministries of the church involve

to some degree a proclamation of the gospel. The ministry of teaching

involves an explanation and defense of the gospel. Genuine Christian

fellowship portrays the power of the gospel in human relationships and

has long been one of the most effective means of drawing people to faith

in Christ. The gospel is central in Christian worship. The Lord's Supper

proclaims Christ's death until he comes. Baptism is a confession of faith

in the gospel and illustrates death to sin and resurrection to newness of

life involved in a response to the gospel. Service makes the love of God

described in the gospel manifest in human life. The gospel is constitutive

of the life of the church. By simply living its life, the church proclaims the

gospel. That is reflected in Acts 2:42-47, where the church is described as

teaching, enjoying fellowship, worshiping, and serving. There is no explicit

mention of the church evangelizing, but the passage concludes: "And the

Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved» (v. 47).

Sadly, there have been periods when the light of the gospel has been

dimmed by corruption and the mandate for international evangelism

ignored, but the darkness has never finally conquered the light. Particu­

larly in the past two hundred years, the church has taken the gospel around

the world and Christianity has become the first and only truly worldwide

religion. In fact, the spread of the gospel into other cultures has raised

the question of to what degree ecclesiology has been shaped by Western

culture and to what degree it preserves biblical imperatives, a question to

which we will return in a coming chapter, when we look at the church in

other, non-Western cultures. For now, we simply note the inevitability of

evangelism whenever the church lives out its nature.

THE MINISTRIES OF THE CHURCH

IN LOCAL CHURCH LIFE

Thus far, we have discussed the ministries of the church as they relate

to the nature of the church and as they constitute a mark that distinguishes

churches from parachurch groups. This next section aims to examine each

one of these ministries in terms of its importance in the life of a local

260 CHAPTER IO

church, with some practical suggestions for implementing, developing, or

enhancing these ministries in a local church context.

The Ministry of Teaching

Acts 2:42 records the devotion of the early church to «the apostles'

teaching:' Though the apostles are gone, their teaching remains for us in the

form of the New Testament. And since the apostles also accepted the Old

Testament, we may place it alongside the New Testament as the material for

the ministry of teaching. Thus, the teaching ministry of the church is the

ministry of the Word of God, or the Bible teaching ministry of the church.

The importance of this ministry is evident in Scripture. As we noted

above, the early name for a follower of Christ, disciple, means «learner:' One

of the disciples' favorite titles for Christ was Rabbi, or teacher, and teaching

was one of his characteristic activities, along with preaching and healing ( see

Matt. 9:35, for example). He commissioned his followers to make disciples,

which involves «teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you"

(Matt. 28:20). The early church continued the emphasis on teaching, from

the devotion to the apostolic teaching noted in Acts 2:42, to the requirement

that church leaders be those «able to teach" ( 1 Tim. 3 : 2 ) , to the title given to

their leaders of'pastors and teachers" (Eph. 4 : 1 1 ) , to the command given to

all believers «to teach and admonish one another" (Col. 3 : 1 6 ) .

In Baptist life, the ministry of the Word has been central. Early

Baptist worship centered around Bible exposition, often extending over

20
several hours. As time has gone by, the length of services has decreased,

but preaching and biblical exposition have always been central. Recently,

however, with the advent of seeker-sensitive services, some have advocated

adapting preaching to speak more clearly to nonbelievers. Rick Warren

urges preachers to adapt their style to their audience. In weekend services,

designed for seekers, Warren begins with a point of common ground, some­

thing all people share, often what are called felt needs, and then moves to

how those needs are addressed in Scripture. He calls this topical exposition,

and believes it works best for evangelism, while he practices a traditional

verse-by-verse exposition in preaching to believers, as the best method for

21
edifying believers. He sees both of these methods as biblical exposition.

20. According to Robert Stein, The Method and Message of Jesus' Teaching (Philadelphia:

Westminster Press, 1978), l, Jesus is called "Teacher" forty-five times in the Gospels and

"Rabbi" fourteen times.

21. For a fascinating description of Baptist worship dating from 1609, involving prayer, the reading
THE MINISTRIES OF THE CHURCH 261

Mark Dever sees a problem with this perspective. While he advocates

being sensitive to the presence of non-Christians in worship services,

speaking in language they can understand, and even crafting titles and

introductions to sermons that are attractive to nonbelievers, still he

insists, "the main weekly Lord's Day gathering of a church is primarily for

Christians, not non-Christians;' and therefore the main goal of preaching

22
should be the edification of believers.

Both Warren and Dever can make a good case for their views.

Warren's research convinced him that if nonbelievers were ever going to

visit a church, it would be on Sunday morning. Therefore, he designed

that service for seekers and placed services for believers at a midweek
23
meeting. But Sunday morning is also the most likely time that church

members will attend, and at even the most seeker-oriented churches, the

overwhelming majority of those present on Sunday mornings will be

believers. Since Sunday morning is a time when the church gathers, Dever

argues, evangelism can be a part of that meeting, but the main point is
24
glorifying God through feeding his flock. Any pastor that wants to teach

his church will have the greatest chance of doing so through his Sunday

sermons. Therefore, pastors should be accommodating and sensitive to

the presence of nonbelievers in their congregations, but address them­

selves primarily to the purpose of teaching the flock in Sunday services.

Such teaching will also indirectly address the purpose of evangelism, for

it will equip church members to live "seeker-sensitive lives" that will result
25
in effective evangelism outside the walls of the church.

Certainly, the ministry of teaching begins with the preaching of the

pastor. His messages should lead his flock into Bible study that results not

only in increased Bible knowledge but also heart and life transformation. But

there is also a need for smaller, more specialized classes. In fact, every church

should develop as part of its teaching ministry a series of classes specifically

designed to teach believers what they need to grow into mature disciples.

of Scripture, and exposition of a text by as many as four or five speakers, see McBeth, Baptist

Heritage, 9 1 - 9 2 .

22. Warren, The Purpose Driven Church, 294.

23. Mark Dever, "Evangelistic Expository Preaching;' in Give Praise to God: A Vision for Reforming

Worship, eds. Philip Graham Ryken, Derek W. H. Thomas, and J. Ligon Duncan III (Phillipsburg,

NJ: P & R Publishing, 2003), 1 3 1 - 3 3 .

24. Warren, The Purpose Driven Church, 245-46.

25. Dever, "Evangelistic Expository Preaching;' 1 3 1 .

262 CHAPTER IO

In the twentieth century, the Southern Baptist Sunday School Board

aggressively promoted Sunday Bible study classes for all ages as a central part

of the Bible teaching ministry of churches. They were so successful that more

than 95 percent of Southern Baptist churches adopted Sunday school classes.

But while such classes take students systematically through the Bible, they

do not follow a conscious design to bring believers to mature discipleship.

One helpful exception is the process developed by Rick Warren at Saddle­

back Community Church in California. They use a diagram of a baseball

diamond, with first, second, third, and home bases. Church membership is

going to first base, and involves completion of a new members, class and

commitment to a membership covenant. But they make it clear that reaching

first base is not the goal. Second base, in their process, involves a class that

focuses on the development of four habits important to the life of a disciple:

Bible study, prayer, tithing, and fellowship. As new members grow toward

maturity, they can take the next step, which involves commitment to a minis­

try. At this level (third base), there is another class that helps members iden­

tify areas of giftedness and possible ministry. The final step in their process

is enlisting members in evangelism, providing training to teach them how to

26
share the message of Christ at home and on mission trips.

Another helpful example comes from Capitol Hill Baptist Church in

Washington, DC. On Sunday mornings, they offer five tracks of what they

call core seminars. The first track, called Basics, includes their member­

ship class, basic disciplines of the Christian life, how to share the gospel,

and a brief course on doctrine. Altogether, it lasts six months. The second

track gives an overview of the Old and New Testaments over a six-month

time frame. The third track gives attendees a six-month introduction to

church history and systematic theology. The fourth track is a year-long

sequence of studies on spiritual disciplines, courtship, dating, marriage,

and parenting. The fifth track is also a year in length and covers evange­

lism, discipling, apologetics, worldviews, and missions. Each track is

continually offered. Students move through at their own pace, in accor­

dance with the own needs and interests, but as they progress through the

various tracks, they are systematically acquainted with the major issues
27
involved in growing to maturity as a Christian.

26. For a more detailed description of Class 1 0 1 , 2 0 1 , 301 and 401, see "Class" under the Saddleback

website (saddleback.com).

27. More information on these core seminars is available at http://www.capitolhillbaptist.org.

THE MINISTRIES OF THE CHURCH 263

Committed to Maturity

Committed to Missions

Figure 1 0 . 2 : The Life Development Process

100 Level Classes

To lead people to Christ and church membership

200 Level Classes

To grow people to spiritual maturity

300 Level Classes

To equip people with the skills they need for ministry

400 Level Classes

To enlist people in the worldwide mission of sharing Christ

Figure 1 0 . 3 : An Overview of"The Life Development Institute"

264 CHAPTER IO

Neither example is perfect nor suited to every church, but they repre­

sent two attempts to provide a comprehensive, thoughtful sequence

of teaching on issues that lead to Christian maturity. Beginning such a

process will require a large commitment of time from pastors and church

leaders. Decisions will have to be made concerning what sequence of

classes can best provide the necessary ingredients for growing members

into disciples. Materials for the classes will have to be developed. Pastors

and elders will either have to teach these classes or train others to teach

them. But such a commitment must be made if churches are to provide

the type of teaching ministry that produces disciples. The alternative is to

continue with a haphazard assortment of Sunday school and other classes

that may or may not provide what members need to grow. This is not

to suggest that Sunday school classes should be abolished. They provide

ongoing avenues for teaching, fellowship, service, and evangelism. But

they should be supplemented by a thoughtful sequence of more specifi­

cally focused, short-term classes, designed for discipleship.

But even small group classes should not exhaust the teaching ministry

of the church. There will be some who need individual mentoring and

there should always be informal teaching going on, as believers teach one

another. On this level, every member of the church should be involved in

the teaching ministry of the church, both as learners and as teachers.

On the whole, churches in America do not seem to be doing a very

good job of teaching. Polls consistently reflect a shocking degree of biblical

28
illiteracy among church members; Baptists seem to have more members

who drop out than move toward maturity. The very idea of teaching,

which involves the notions of truth and error, runs counter to the relativ­

istic culture of our day. We tend to gravitate more toward the experiential

than the mental, and some suggest that our very ability to think has been

corrupted by the pervasive influence of the image-oriented medium of

television. Pastors who seek to be good teachers struggle to find the time

to study amidst their myriad responsibilities. Yet, despite these obstacles,

the church cannot abdicate its calling to be "the pillar and foundation of

28. Among the dismaying findings from a 2014 survey is that 59 percent of evangelicals believe the

Holy Spirit is a force, not a personal being. More directly connected to the topic of this book,

more than half of those in the survey say worshiping alone or with one's family is as good as

going to church ( 5 2 % ) . See Bob Smietana, ''Americans Believe in Heaven, Hell, and a Little Bit of

Heresy;' http://lifewayresearch.com/2014/ 10/28/ americans-believe-in-heaven-and-a-little-bit­

of-heresy, accessed 6/30/2017.

THE MINISTRIES OF THE CHURCH 265

the truth" ( 1 Tim. 3 : 1 5 ) . The nature of the church, its commission to make

disciples, and its allegiance to the God of truth, compel churches today to

give renewed attention to the ministry of teaching.

The Ministry of Fellowship

Fellowship is a common word among Baptist churches. Many even

have buildings called "fellowship halls:' They are often the site of a favorite

Baptist activity, a meal called a fellowship supper. But, beyond food, what

does the church's ministry of fellowship involve? Is it just another term for

Christian socializing?

We may begin by noting several interesting implications arising

from the word for fellowship in the New Testament, koinonia. The first

is that there is no counterpart for this word in the Old Testament and

there is no occurrence of the word in the New Testament prior to Acts

2 : 4 2 . So genuine fellowship seems to have been an impossibility prior

to the coming of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost. Further, John

7 : 3 9 indicates that the Spirit was not given until Jesus was glorified. The

implication is that any genuine experience of fellowship on the human

level must be preceded by fellowship with God, who embodies fellow­

ship in his triune nature, created humans for fellowship, and bestows

fellowship on his people. Fellowship with God was made possible when

Jesus was glorified ( i . e . , crucified, buried, raised, and ascended). Those

who experience fellowship with Jesus become indwelt by his Spirit. The

Spirit then joins believers together and grants them fellowship with

one another.

A second implication arises from the root meaning of fellowship as

participating or sharing something in common with another. It seems

that one way the Spirit grants believers fellowship with one another is

by revealing to them all they share in common in Christ. This explains

how otherwise diverse believers can experience oneness in Christ; what

they have in common outweighs their differences. Their oneness is then

expressed in a corporate life of love and service to one another.

To summarize, we may say that the fellowship that is a ministry of the

church is a gift of God, based on fellowship with him. It mirrors the divine

fellowship that occurs eternally in the relationship that the members of the

Trinity enjoy with one another, and fellowship is a need implanted by God

in humans, as a consequence of their creation in his image. Fellowship

consists in a common sharing or participation in the blessings of salva-

266 CHAPTER IO

tion, a commonality we perceive due to the action of the indwelling Holy

Spirit, who thus creates fellowship. Fellowship is expressed in the common

life and intimate relationships believers share in the church. This is what

fellowship is. We now press on to two further questions. How important

is the ministry of fellowship to a local church? How may local churches

faithfully cultivate the ministry of fellowship among their members?

To understand the importance of fellowship, we need to recall the

radical nature of Christ's call. It takes precedence over all human ties.

Responding to such a call can be difficult, for humans are social creatures,

and conversion in some contexts will involve a loss of previous relation -

ships. Made in the image of a God who is a triune community, human

beings are created for community. So in calling us, God calls us corpo­

rately, to be not isolated believers, but part of his people indeed, members

of his family. N. T. Wright sees the only explanation for the commands of

Jesus requiring absolute loyalty to him to lie in the fact that he saw himself

«as creating an alternative family'?" Drawing upon what is described as the

«strong-group cultural orientation of first-century Palestine;' Joseph Hell­

erman explains, «In a social setting where each and every person found his

identity in the group to which he belonged, a call to leave one's primary

group-the family-in order to follow an individual [Jesus] would make

30
sense only iffollowing that individual meant joining his group:'

The fellowship we experience as part of his people is not just an enjoy­

able optional luxury; it is part of God's essential provision for us, from

which we draw strength and vitality. One has called fellowship «the blood

that flows through the veins of the church giving it health and vibrancy?"
32
It may justly be regarded as a means of sustaining and sanctifying grace.

In fact, the centrality of fellowship in the life of the church is reflected

33
in the dozens of «one another" commands in the New Testament. It is

only in obeying these commands that the church can fulfill its purpose.

29. N. T. Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996), 401.

30. Hellerman, When the Church Was a Family, 7 1 . Italics in original.

31. I am indebted to my student Jeremy Oddy for this comparison in an unpublished paper,

"Christian Fellowship: A Study of Koinonia in the Church:'

32. This should not be confused with saving grace, which is received by faith alone. Fellowship

is a means of sustaining or sanctifying grace in that it is one of many activities by which God

strengthens believers. See the discussion in Grudem, Systematic Theology 9 5 0 - 5 1 .

33. I have counted at least thirty-one different commands. "Love one another" is found at least

seventeen times; "encourage one another" four times; "forgive one another" four times; "serve

one another" three times. Most of the others are found once or twice.
THE MINISTRIES OF THE CHURCH 267

For example, consider the classical marks of the church: one, holy, catho­

lic, and apostolic. For the church to experience oneness, members must

"[ljive in harmony with one another" (Rom. 1 2 : 1 6 ) . Holiness is developed

as members "build each other up" ( 1 Thess. 5: 1 1 ) and "spur one another

on toward love and good deeds" (Heb. 1 0 : 2 4 ) . The catholicity or universal

nature of the church is expressed when members "[ajccept one another"

(Rom. 1 5 : 7 ) , regardless of race, age, sex, or class. The apostolicity of the

church is ensured as members of the body "teach and admonish one

another" (Col. 3 : 1 6 ) .

Its importance is further seen in its intimate relationship to the other

ministries of the church. We have already mentioned how fellowship is

expressed in the teaching ministry of the church, as members teach and

admonish one another. Fellowship also provides the motivation for the

ministry of service. In fact, the most frequent usage of koiruinia in the

New Testament is for the sharing of material needs (Rom. 1 2 : 1 3 ; 1 5 : 2 6 - 2 7 ;

2 Cor. 9 : 1 3 ; 1 Tim. 6 : 1 8 ; Heb. 1 3 : 1 6 ) . Serving one another in terms of the

practical, material needs of life is itself an expression of fellowship. The

ministry of worshiping God is hollow if fellowship with others is broken.

First John repeatedly relates fellowship with God and proper fellowship

with others ( 1 : 5 - 7 ; 2 : 9 ; 3:10, 14; 4:7-8, 11-12, 19-21). Love for God,

expressed in worship, and love for God's people, expressed in fellowship,

cannot be separated. Bruce Milne boldly says, "No man can be reconciled

to God without being reconciled to the people of God within whom his

experience of God's grace sets him.?" Even the ministry of evangelism is

enhanced or undermined by the quality of fellowship manifested in the

lives of church members.

Church planters are finding that often a conversion to community

takes place in a nonbeliever's life before a conversion to Christ. Espe­

cially among postmoderns, they are finding that these young nonbelievers

want to belong before they believe. It is as if they are only interested in a

35
message that produces true community. And not only in recent times,

this correlation goes back to the book of Acts. Benjamin Wilson observes

that statements of striking growth in the book of Acts "occur consistently

in contexts which highlight the quality of the community life and visible

34. Milne, We Belong Together, 19.

35. See Ed Stetzer and David Putnam, Breaking the Missional Code: Your Church Can Become a

Missionary in Your Community (Nashville: B & H, 2006), 1 2 3 - 3 3 .

268 CHAPTER IO

36
actions of Christian congregations (cf. Acts 2:47; 6:7; 9 : 3 1 ; 1 1 : 2 4 ; 19:20):'

This is supported by Michael Green, who says of the early Christians in his

study Evangelism in the Early Church: "Their community life, though far

from perfect . . . was nevertheless sufficiently different and impressive to

attract notice, to invite curiosity, and to inspire discipleship . . . . Paganism

saw in early Christianity a quality ofliving, and supremely of dying, which

could not be found elsewhere'?" By contrast, Howard Snyder suspects

that the reason many churches are not effective in evangelism today is

because "their communal experience of the gospel is too weak and taste­

less to be worth sharing . . . . But where Christian fellowship demonstrates

the gospel, believers come alive and sinners get curious and want to know

what the secret is. So true Christian community (koiniinia) becomes both

the basis and goal of evangelism'?"

Fellowship is essential to fulfilling the ministries of the church because

fellowship is the church acting corporately to fulfill its corporate mandate.

Kenneth Boa sees seven characteristics of the church's corporate ministry:

corporate love and compassion, corporate identity and purpose, corpo­

rate nurture and service, corporate discernment, corporate forgiveness

and reconciliation, corporate authority and submission, and corporate

39
worship and prayer. Fellowship addresses all of these purposes, directly

or indirectly.

Finally, on a practical level, sociologists Rodney Stark and Roger

Finke note the importance of fellowship for both the initial impetus to

join a church and the continuing involvement of new church members.

On the basis of more than twenty-five studies, they claim that it has been

fairly well established that those who join a new group are generally "those

whose interpersonal attachments to members overbalanced their attach­

ments to nonmembers."? Moreover, one's commitment level after joining

is strongly affected by the commitment level of those closest to her. That is,

36. Benjamin R. Wilson, "The Depiction of Church Growth in Acts;' Journal of the Evangelical

Theological Society 60, no. 2 (June 2 0 1 7 ) : 3 3 1 .

37. Green, Evangelism in the Early Church, 274-75.

38. Howard Snyder, Community of the King (1977; reprint, Downers Grove, IL: Inter Varsity, 1978),

124-25.

39. Kenneth Boa, Conformed to His Image: Biblical and Practical Approaches to Spiritual Formation

(Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001), 426.

40. Rodney Stark and Roger Finke, Acts of Faith: Explaining the Human Side of Religion (Berkeley:

University of California Press, 2000), 1 1 7 .

THE MINISTRIES OF THE CHURCH 269

41
if her closest friends are not committed to the church, neither will she be.

If those joining a church do not develop a significant number of fellowship

relationships fairly soon after they enter the church, they become excel­

lent candidates for dropping out. Many people may join a church because

of the pastor, but those who become active in the church will normally

not leave when the pastor leaves because they develop friendships with

others in the church. By contrast, church dropouts leave because they lack

meaningful relationships. For a church to be a New Testament church at

all, it must offer the ministry of fellowship to its members. For it to be a

healthy church, its ministry of fellowship must be healthy. It is indispens­

ably important to every aspect of the church.

Unfortunately, much of American culture presents obstacles to the

development of fellowship. America is widely recognized as having one

of the most individualistic cultures in the world. We honor the person

who goes his own way, and value the virtue of self-reliance. But such atti­

tudes are antithetical to the development of fellowship. America is also

a very mobile society, and fellowship requires time for relationships to

develop. Sometimes families have to move for a variety of reasons, but

the value of the fellowship the family experiences in the church should

be a factor that may question the wisdom of some moves. More recently,

the influence of the consumer society has adversely affected how Ameri­

cans approach church membership. Many American Christians see them­

selves, consciously or unconsciously, as consumers of religious goods and

services provided by churches. They «pay" for the goods and services by

their presence, participation, and giving, but they always retain the right

to go elsewhere if they find a producer ( church) that offers better goods

and services. They justify leaving their church because «it isn't meeting

our needs.?? How different is the perspective of the New Testament! The

church is like a family, and one cannot retain the right to transfer families;

the church is like a body, and one amputates a part of the body only under

extreme circumstances. Joining a church is an expression of a commit­

ment to the fellowship, not a commitment to having one's needs met.

What, then, can churches do to cultivate this important minis­

try? One simple but often overlooked imperative is the necessity of the

preceding ministry of teaching the truths of the gospel. Bruce Milne says,

41. Ibid., 147.

42. For more on the impact of consumerism, see Shelley and Shelley, Consumer Church.
270 CHAPTER IO

«Only the truths of apostolic Christianity, embraced and whole-heartedly

adhered to, effectively break up the sinful isolation of the human heart

and create the possibility of true relationship at depth with others.?" As we

said above, fellowship with God, created through embracing the gospel, is

prerequisite to fellowship with members of the body. First John 1 : 7 says it

is only as «we walk in the light, as he is in the light, [that] we have fellow­

ship with one another:'

Embracing the gospel creates the possibility of fellowship, but

churches can do more to move members from the possibility of fellow­

ship to its reality. Rick Warren encourages churches to develop a plan to

assimilate members and connect them to fellowship, thinking through the

questions prospective new members have: Do I fit here? Does anybody

want to know me? Am I needed? What is the advantage of joining? What

44
is required of members? The first place such questions can be addressed

and the first step in bringing a new member into full fellowship is a new

member's class. Happily, such classes are becoming increasingly common

in Baptist churches. We discussed earlier the importance of such a class

for the development and maintenance of regenerate church membership.

It is also crucial in the development of a healthy ministry of fellowship.

Such a class should elicit from new members a commitment to fellowship,

embodied in signing the church covenant.

The new members' class is also their first involvement in what is perhaps

the central necessity for fellowship; that is, a context for developing relation­

ships. Most people's first level of involvement is in the large-group worship

service of the church. But that service is not primarily designed for fellow­

ship; it is vertically oriented to worship of God, not fellowship with others.

Therefore, churches need to create other contexts in which fellowship can

develop, where people can talk and share their lives. From his study of Paul's

letters, James Samra has concluded that a major factor in Christians growing

to maturity in the New Testament was their involvement in such contexts

where Christians gathered and built each other up (Eph. 4 : 1 6 ) . He says,

«When believers assemble together their 'being-in-Christ' is uniquely actu­

alized and maturation is made 'uniquely possible'?" Good things happen

when there are contexts where Christians can assemble.

43. Milne, We Belong Together, 94.

44. Warren, The Purpose Driven Church, 3 1 2 .

45. Samra, Being Conformed to Christ in Community, 1 3 5 .

THE MINISTRIES OF THE CHURCH 271

Often, fellowship develops when people work on something together.

Choirs, mission teams, even some committees develop fellowship as they

work together. But most often fellowship is nurtured in small groups.

Sunday school classes can be one type of small group for developing

fellowship, but in most cases, time constraints and the proper emphasis on

teaching limit the depth of fellowship in such classes. My own experience

of fellowship has been richest in home-based small groups. Such small

groups can be built around common interests, a common struggle, or a

common geographical location, but the goal will be to share a common

life in Christ. According to Rick Warren, "Small groups are the most effec­
46
tive way of closing the back door ofyour church." Constant creation of new

small groups is the single most important step a church can take to stimu­

late the ministry of fellowship in their midst. This is especially true in a

growing church, for as the church grows larger, relationships and fellow­
47
ship suffer, unless they are sustained in small groups.

One final step in cultivating ongoing fellowship is proper celebration

of the communion meal, the Lord's Supper. But since that meal relates to

the ministries of worship and teaching as well as fellowship, and since the

understanding of the Lord's Supper has been a dividing point for many

denominations, we will give it, along with baptism, separate consideration

in the following chapter.

The Ministry of Worship

The ministry of worship is rooted in both the nature and historical

background of the church. The church is God's people, called to declare the

praises of the one who called them out of darkness and into his wonderful

light ( 1 Peter 2 : 9 - 1 0 ) . As the temple of the Holy Spirit, the church is to do

that for which temples are erected, namely, worship God. Furthermore,

the historical background in which the church was born assured that it

would be a worshiping community. They continued, at least initially, to

meet in the temple and continued to offer the prayers that were a part of

temple worship (Acts 2:42, 46). However, as Robert Saucy notes, there is

no record of the early disciples offering up sacrifices, which was the main

act of worship in the temple; they saw the sacrificial system as fulfilled in

46. Warren, The Purpose Driven Church, 327 (emphasis in original).

47. See the discussion in Stark and Finke, Acts of Faith, 157-60.
272 C H A P T E R 10

48
Christ. Instead, their worship would soon include a commemoration of

his one sacrifice. They also had in their background worship in the syna­

gogue, which included three main elements: corporate praise, prayers, and

the reading and instruction in the Law and Prophets ( as reflected in Luke
49
4:16-21 and Acts 1 3 : 1 5 - 4 2 ) . It was this pattern that is reflected most

strongly in early Christian worship. Will Willimon says, "By the end of the

first century, Christians were to have a liturgy directly derived from syna­

gogue worship'?" While the pattern was drawn from their background in

Judaism, the content was revised by their experience of Christ, the coming

of the Holy Spirit, and the Christian message.

David Peterson argues that New Testament worship is distinctively

different from that of the Old Testament in that worship is no longer

associated with a particular place, such as the tabernacle or temple, nor

with a particular time, such as Passover, but worship is all of life, as Paul
51
describes it in Romans 1 2 : 1 . Still, the early church did observe specific

times of worship. Justin Martyr gives a fascinating description of Chris­

tian worship in the middle of the second century:

And on the day called Sunday there is a meeting in one place of those who

live in the cities or the country, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writ­

ings of the prophets are read as long as time permits. When the reader has

finished, the president in a discourse urges and invites [us] to the imitation

of these noble things. Then we all stand together and offer prayers.

He then describes their celebration of the Lord's Supper, noting that the

deacons are assigned to take the elements to those absent, and that they
52
also take up an offering.

There is no definition of worship in Scripture, but the origin of the

word provides a clue. Worship comes from the Anglo-Saxon word weorth­

scipe, which became worthship and then worship. To worship God is to

ascribe worth to him. Psalm 29:2 says, "Ascribe to the LORD the glory due

his name; worship the LORD in the splendor of his holiness:' The most

48. Saucy, The Church in God's Program, 177.

49. Ralph P. Martin, Worship in the Early Church (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964), 24-26.

50. William H. Willimon, Word, Water, Wine and Bread: How Worship Has Changed Over the Years

(Valley Forge, PA: Judson Press, 1980), 16.

51. David Peterson, Engaging with God (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1992), 284-88.

52. Justin Martyr, "The First Apology of Justin, the Martyr;' 67, in Early Christian Fathers, Library of

Christian Classics, 287.

THE MINISTRIES OF THE CHURCH 273

common biblical words for worship (siilpih in the Old Testament and

proskuneii in the New Testament) associate worship with bowing down,

humble prostration, and awe-filled reverence before God. This indicates

the profoundly God-centered nature of true worship. But the New Testa­

ment also describes other characteristics of true worship.

Perhaps the most often quoted text concerning worship comes from

John 4:24, where Jesus says that those who worship God must do so «in

the Spirit [pneuma] and in truth [aletheia]." This implies further char­

acteristics of true worship. True worship is Spirit-empowered. And since

the Spirit comes to exalt Christ (John 1 6 : 1 4 ) , true worship will be Christ­

focused. The reference to truth implies that true worship is bounded and

shaped by truth, truth as embodied in Christ and as preserved in Scripture.

Thus, true worship will be biblically grounded. The concern for truth or

doctrine, while necessary to honor God rightly, also points to secondary

purposes for worship on the human side. The primary purpose of worship

is to honor God, but as worship is portrayed in the New Testament, it

also serves the purpose of edifying believers and evangelizing nonbeliev­

ers. First Corinthians 14:26, speaking specifically of the occasions when

believers come together, insists that everything «must be done so that the

church may be built up:' David Peterson goes further and says that in the

New Testament, worship is all of life, while the focal purpose of the time

when the church gathers and sings, prays, and hears the Word is edifi­
53
cation. But this may be separating worship and edification too neatly.

Worship should be seen as multifaceted. Certainly the focus should be on

glorifying God. But since knowing and believing the truth glorifies God,

worship should have an element of teaching, especially in the preaching of

the word, but also singing songs filled with truth teaches us. Celebrating

the Lord's Supper serves the function both of evangelism, as we proclaim

the Lord's death and its meaning, and the ministry of fellowship, as one

aspect of the Lord's Supper is communion with one another.

These different dimensions help to explain some of the elements of

worship. For example, prayer in worship expresses our adoration of God

but also allows us to seek God's help in edifying believers and winning

nonbelievers. Hearing the preaching of God's Word honors God but is

also a major means of edifying the church. Even the music we sing to

praise God can serve to teach or remind us of the truth about God.

53. Peterson, Engaging with God, 287.

274 C H A P T E R 10

The following may serve as a summary of the chief characteristics of

true worship.

True worship is:

• God-centered-that is, God is the supreme object of our worship, his

glory is our supreme concern in worship, he is the audience to whom

our praise is directed.

• Spirit-empowered-that is, the Spirit is the one who initiates, enables,

and prompts us to worship.

• Christ-focused-that is, Christian worship is directed to the God

who revealed himself to us in Christ, the same Christ to whom the

Spirit bears witness, the Christ who is the truth.

• Biblically grounded and shaped-that is, all that we do in worship

must be in harmony with these biblical characteristics of true worship.

• Multifaceted-that is, while the purpose and focus of worship is

honoring God, some aspects of worship also inevitably edify believ­

53
ers and proclaim the gospel to nonbelievers.

Figure 10.4: A Definition ofTrue Worship

Unfortunately, the worship of the church has not always exempli­

fied these characteristics. In the medieval church, the celebration of

the Lord's Supper became increasingly the center of worship, to the

neglect of other elements. Further, the role of the priest's mediation was

emphasized so as to make the congregation virtually spectators rather

than participants. The Reformation's change in theology also produced

a change in worship. The preaching of the Word became a central part

of worship, a fact that was reflected in church architecture, which placed

55
the pulpit in a central location.

Early Baptist worship was often several hours long and featured exten­

sive exposition of Scripture along with prayers and a contribution taken for

54. This diagram bears some resemblance to the definition offered by D. A. Carson, "Worship Under

the Word;' in Worship by the Book, ed. D. A. Carson (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2002), 26, but

he focuses on the doxological element of worship.

55. In a work surveying Reformation theologians, Carter Lindberg notes that "each and every one of

them focused on ministry;' and that the refrain throughout their work "is the recovery of biblical

preaching and pastoral theology:' See Carter Lindberg, "Trajectories of Reformation Theology;'

in The Reformation Theologians: An Introduction to Theology in the Early Modern Period, ed.

Carter Lindberg (Oxford, UK and Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2002), 380.

THE MINISTRIES OF THE CHURCH 275

the poor. Baptism was a part of worship, as was the Lord's Supper. Some

celebrated the Lord's Supper every week, but most eventually adopted the

pattern of Zwingli and the church in Zurich of quarterly observance. The

most important contribution of Baptists to Protestant worship in the seven­

teenth century involved the singing of hymns. The key figure was Benjamin

Keach, who argued for the appropriateness of hymn-singing in a 1 6 9 1 work

called The Breach Repaired in God's Worship, or Singing ofPsalms, Hymns and

56
Spiritual Songs proved to be an Holy Ordinance of Jesus Christ. By the end

of the seventeenth century, hymn-singing began to catch on among English

Baptists. In America, Keach's son, Elias, was a key figure in the Philadelphia

Baptist Association, whose confession of faith specifically endorsed hymn­

singing, and singing has become a central element of Baptist worship.

By and large Baptist churches have been non-liturgical in the sense

that there have been few written prayers, confessions, or responses. Baptist

hymnals have printed selections of Scripture for responsive reading in

worship services, but few churches use them. This is an area where most

Baptist churches could improve. Paul commanded Timothy to devote

himself"to the public reading of Scripture" ( 1 Tim. 4 : 1 3 ) , but aside from the

sermon text, Scripture is seldom read in many Baptist churches. Terry John­

son and Ligon Duncan III comment: "Not reading the Scriptures is on the

same order as not having a sermon or omitting congregational singing?"

A careful, thoughtful reading of Scripture serves both to honor God and to

edify believers by exposing them to the whole counsel of God. But to do so

requires careful planning to choose texts that range throughout Scripture and
58
to choose readers who can read Scripture with understanding and feeling.

Baptist worship has typically followed the Reformation emphasis on

the preaching of God's Word, though the time expended on reading and

expounding it has dropped from several hours in the early days of Baptist

life to perhaps thirty minutes in today's worship. It is another example of

the multidimensional nature of worship. We honor God in hearing his

Word preached, because God's Word recounts the wondrous deeds and

nature of God. Also, in preaching the Word the pastor teaches the whole

56. For more on Keach, see J. Barry Vaughn, "Benjamin Keach;' in Baptist Theologians, ed. Timothy

George and David Dockery (Nashville: Broadman, 1990), 49-76.

57. Terry L. Johnson and J. Ligon Duncan III, "Reading and Praying the Bible in Corporate

Worship;' in Give Praise to God, 143. Johnson and Duncan also include eleven pieces of counsel

concerning the public reading of Scripture.

58. R. Kent Hughes, "Free Church Worship;' in Worship by the Book, 176, gives some helpful

suggestions on public reading of Scripture.

276 C H A P T E R 10

congregation, and they are thus edified. And, since Baptist pastors often

include the gospel message in their preaching, it can serve an evangelistic

function. However, since the New Testament emphasis is on congrega­

tional edification in worship (see 1 Cor. 1 4 : 2 6 ) , evangelism should not be

the primary aim.

1. Over the years, I have given pastors, church leaders, and students

an assignment to help them improve the worship services at their

churches. It is very simple. Have someone take a stopwatch and time

every element in an average worship service: how much time is spent

in prayer, reading Scripture, singing, the preaching of Scripture,

taking an offering, etc.

2. Most who do the assignment above are surprised at the lack of time

devoted to two elements of worship. They form the next two sugges­

tions for improving worship. First, devote more time and thought to

the reading of Scripture in public worship. It is an element of public

worship that is commanded ( 1 Tim. 4 : 1 3 ) , but is not given much

attention or time in most worship services that I have attended.

3. Second, most are also surprised at how little time is spent in public

worship in prayer. This is another area where time, attention, and

preparation are needed.

4. I think most Baptist churches could do a much better job in how they

celebrate baptism and the Lord's Supper, but I will defer specifics on

those until the following chapter.

59
Figure 1 0 . 5 : Four Suggestions for Improving Worship Services

Prayer has also been a consistent feature of Baptist worship, in obedi­

ence to the commands in 1 Timothy 2 and elsewhere that place prayer

in the context of public worship. As mentioned above, we have almost

universally eschewed written prayer in favor of spontaneous prayer. Still,

careful planning could improve the element of prayer in Baptist worship.

Baptist pastors and worship leaders spend hours preparing sermons and

59. Though they may go too far on some points, I commend consideration of some of the suggestions

of Iohnson and Duncan, "Reading and Praying the Bible in Corporate Worship;' in Give Praise to

God, 140-69.
THE MINISTRIES OF THE CHURCH 277

rehearsing music, but seem to feel that it is somehow wrong to think

through what they should include in public prayer. Prayer is our direct

address to God, and a thoughtful prayer should lead worshipers to adore,

confess, intercede, and thank God. Preparation doesn't make sermons or

music less heartfelt; neither should it have any effect on prayer but to make
60
it a more helpful and positive aspect of worship.

Guiding Baptists in their choice of the elements of worship, at least

to some degree in the past, has been what is called the regulative prin­

ciple. This principle has held that worship should only include those

elements that Scripture explicitly or implicitly endorses. It is contrasted

with the normative principle, which advocated the view that whatever

is not prohibited is permissible in worship. A Baptist preference for the

regulative principle would be expected in view of their desire to be bibli­

cal in all they do, and support for the regulative principle is explicit in the

Second London Confession (or, as it was known in America, the Phila­

delphia Confession), which states: "the acceptable way of worshiping the

true God is instituted by himself, and so limited by his own revealed will

that he may not be worshiped according to the imaginations and devices

of men, nor the suggestions of Satan, under any visible representations,

or any other way not prescribed in the Holy Scriptures,"?' However, as

Jerry Marcellino notes, this principle alone is not altogether helpful, for

no evangelical would say that he desires to worship in a way contrary

to the Word of God; the difficulty is in the application of the princi­

62
ple. There are so many questions concerning the specifics of worship

left unaddressed by Scripture and so few commands given concerning

it, especially in the New Testament, that my sense is that few are guided

in their worship planning today by consideration of the regulative prin­

ciple. Even those most zealously seeking to be biblical must be guided,

on many matters, by pastoral wisdom.

60. Ibid., 175. Hughes also gives helpful resources and suggestions for planning to lead congregational

prayer, as do Johnson and Duncan, "Reading and Praying the Bible in Corporate Worship;'

165-66.

61. For more discussion of the regulative principle, see J. Ligon Duncan III, "Does God Care How

We Worship?" in Give Praise to God, 17-50; and Derek W. H. Thomas, "The Regulative Principle:

Responding to Recent Criticism:' in Give Praise to God, 74-93. See also Ernest C. Reisinger and

D. Matthew Allen, Worship: The Regulative Principle and the Biblical Practice of Accommodation

(Cape Coral, FL: Founders Press, 2 0 0 1 ) .

62. Jerry Marcellino, "Leading the Church in God-Centered Worship: The Pastoral Role;' in

Reforming Pastoral Ministry, 142.

278 C H A P T E R 10

One element where pastoral wisdom is especially needed is in the

area of congregational singing. Though I believe it to be subsiding today,

many churches in recent years have experienced what some have called

«the worship wars:' This «war" is between contemporary and traditional

styles of worship, and is marked most noticeably by differing musical

styles. Contemporary music replaces organ and piano with guitar and

drums, replaces hymns with praise choruses, and replaces choirs with

63
praise teams. Often such churches adopt casual dress, and seek in

other ways to present fewer obstacles and more attractiveness to those

they call «seekers:' K. H. Sargeant says, «Seeker church leaders design

new, contemporary forms of worship to mirror the musical and cultural

preferences of contemporary society.v' Rick Warren says frankly, «You

must match your music to the kind of people God wants your church

to reach.?" He sees no theological obstacle involved in musical style, as

long as the lyrics are Christian. Others are not so sure.

Marva Dawn says, «Style is not the issue . . . . The question is whether

our worship services immerse us in God's splendor. . . . The value of the

liturgies established by the Church over time (in new settings and old)

is that they do not depend on any leader's personality; instead they keep

the focus on the God who is the Subject of our worship.t'" As well, she

sees much of contemporary music as «filled with stuff that trivializes God

and forms narcissistic people;' while hymnals contain music that has been

sorted over time so that most of traditional music «is quite good theologi­

cally and musically?"

Others offer more reserved cautions. Jerry Marcellino acknowledges

that we cannot say that all styles other than traditional are wrong; he

believes that to do so would involve «cultural bigotry?" Elmer Towns and

Ed Stetzer make the same point from history: "Any Christian who reads
69
history would know there is no one right waY:' But both are concerned

63. A survey of more than seven hundred Southern Baptist churches conducted in 2000 found that

more than half of those categorized as contemporary in worship style had experienced conflict

over worship. See Philip B. Jones, "Research Report;' 4.

64. Kirnon Howland Sargeant, Seeker Churches: Promoting Traditional Religion in a Nontraditional

Way (New Brunswick, NJ/London, UK: Rutgers University Press, 2000), 55.

65. Warren, Purpose Driven Church, 280.

66. Marva Dawn, A Royal "Waste" of Time: The Splendor of Worshiping God and Being Church for the

World (Grand Rapids/Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans, 1999), 158.

67. Ibid., 150.

68. Marcellino, "Leading the Church in God-Centered Worship;' 143.

69. Towns and Stetzer, Perimeters of Light, 98.

THE MINISTRIES OF THE CHURCH 279

that we exercise some caution in the use of contemporary music. Marcel­

lino recommends that we ask ourselves questions such as: Is the music

"essentially free of strong worldly associations"? Does it conform to the

criteria of Philippians 4:8 (true, noble, right, pure, lovely, admirable, excel­

lent, praiseworthy)!" Towns and Stetzer expand the question we should

ask in this fashion: "What impact does this music have on the culture via

association, memory, emotions, understanding, and music? These are not

easy questions-but they are essential,"?'

A final issue related to worship has been raised by seeker churches, with

Willow Creek and Saddleback the most prominent examples. Though the

seeker church movement may have crested, it has left a definite impression.

It has sensitized most churches to the need to be at least aware that there

may be those in their worship services that they call "seekers:' They are

not yet believers and may need some help with the language and customs

of churches. So explanations of Christian jargon and why we do what we

do may be needed to help such seekers understand the Christian message.

But some seeker churches go much further and design their entire Sunday

services to appeal to these seekers, with music, drama, multimedia and

"talks" (rather than sermons) all designed to appeal to seekers." But if we

think that God is the primary audience in worship, can a seeker service

really be called a worship service?

Many in the seeker church movement would say no, that seeker

services are for evangelism, not worship, and they provide times for believ­

ers to worship and be edified through midweek services and/or small

groups. Rick Warren says frankly that he preaches differently at the two
73
different types of services, and one study of the churches affiliated with

the Willow Creek Association states that seeker churches are increasingly

recognizing the need for separate services for believers, where worship of

God and edification of believers is central. Still, that same study found that

as of 2000, more than 60 percent of the churches affiliated with the Willow
74
Creek Association had no such separate believers' service.

70. Marcellino, "Leading the Church in God-Centered Worship:' 143.

71. Towns and Stetzer, Primeters of Light, 107-8.

72. For an example, see Warren, The Purpose- Driven Church, 2 5 1 - 77, a chapter entitled, "Designing

a Seeker-Sensitive Service:'

73. Ibid., 294.

74. Sargeant, Seeker Churches, 25.

280 C H A P T E R 10

There is some reason for concern that in their zeal to connect with

seekers and win them, some churches may be losing their focus in their

worship services and that services designed for seekers may not be accom­

plishing all that worship should for believers. In their remarkable self­
75
study, Reveal: Where Are You?, Willow Creek honestly reported some

troubling findings. From thousands of responses, and more than one

hundred interviews from Willow Creek and six other American churches,

they reported that they are doing well in meeting the needs of the least

mature of their attenders, those self-described as "exploring Christianity"

or younger believers who are "growing in Christ:' But among the more

mature attenders, those "close to Christ" or "Christ-centered," there was

considerable dissatisfaction. About one-fourth described themselves as

"stalled" or "dissatisfied with the church;' so much so that many in this

76
group were considering leaving the church.

I have a great deal of respect for many in the seeker church move­

ment. Research shows that they are overwhelmingly conservative in their

theological orientation, and passionate about winning lost people to

77
Jesus. In particular, I find much to applaud in Rick Warren's approach.

Yet in their zeal to reach the lost, might it be that they are contribut­

ing to a loss of focus in worship services that is not sustaining to the

growth of believers? There is no straight line from the seeker services

Willow Creek employs to the findings in their self-study, but there is

enough plausibility in a connection between the two to raise a question

about how far churches should go in terms of a seeker orientation in

their worship services.

The description of the worship of the early church in Acts 2 gives more

helpful guidance on worship. First, it is worth noting that a God-centered

worship service need not be antithetical to evangelism. The early church's

worship manifested God's presence among them and was noted by the

surrounding world (Acts 2:43, 47; 5 : 1 2 - 1 4 ; 1 Cor. 14:24-25). Yet evange­

lism was a byproduct of worship, not the design of worship.

75. Greg L. Hawkins and Cally Parkinson, Reveal: Where Are You? (South Barrington, IL: Willow

Creek Association, 2007).

76. "What Reveal Reveals;' Christianity Today, http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2008/

march/11.27.html, accessed 7/3/2017.

77. Sargeant found that 98 percent of the seeker church pastors surveyed identified themselves as

"evangelicals;' and 99 percent agreed that "the Bible is the inspired word of God, true in all its

teachings:' Sargeant, Seeker Churches, 2 0 - 2 1 .

THE MINISTRIES OF THE CHURCH 281

Second, whatever the style of worship, it should elicit the same twofold

response we see in Acts 2. On the one hand, the early worshipers felt a sense

of awe (Acts 2:43) as they saw God at work among them. Thus, worship

should be so God-centered that it will produce not necessarily comfort,

but reverence, awe, and submission. In worship we should encounter the

One before whose greatness we feel our smallness. Contemporary worship

does not always do this well. Some of its music does exalt God's greatness in

marvelous ways, but the casual atmosphere of most contemporary worship

can lead to a casual attitude toward God rather than an attitude of awe.

But alongside the sense of awe, there was a joyful sense of praise in early

Christian worship (Acts 2:47). Praise comes as we recognize that the great

God, before whom we bow in awe, has, in his great mercy and amazing love,

provided forgiveness and life in Jesus Christ. He has called us his children

and bids us stand, give him praise, and rejoice in his love for us. And it is

on this count that much of traditional worship can be faulted. An excessive

emphasis on reverence can dull any exuberant expression of praise, while

advocates of contemporary worship believe worship should be joyful, excit­

ing, and enthusiastic. These two keynotes can be compared in this way:

Reverence and "Praise"

Characterized by reverent awe. Characterized by joyful praise.

Honors God for his holiness. Rejoices in God's love.

God is transcendent and above us. God is immanent and with us.

"Be still and know that I am God:' "Shout for joy to the Lord, the King:'

Figure 10.6: The Two Keynotes of Worship

The key is balancing these two keynotes of worship. Contemporary

worshipers may need to take care that they not obscure God's holiness.

One of the earliest studies of Willow Creek found that 70 percent of the

sermons emphasized God's love, while only 7 percent dealt with God's

78
holiness. Admittedly, this survey was of the seeker service, not the believ-

78. Gregory Pritchard, "The Strategy of Willow Creek" (Ph.D. diss., Northwestern University,

1994), 769.
282 C H A P T E R 10

ers' service, and comes from the early 1990s, but it represents the danger

contemporary worship can face. Traditionalists need to guard against the

opposite danger: joyless worship that does not actively engage worshipers

in praise, but leaves them to sit in silence.

One final element of worship, central to worship for much of the

church's history, we have not yet considered. That is the role of the sacra­

ments, or as they are more commonly called among Baptists, the ordi­

nances of baptism and the Lord's Supper. They are vital acts of worship,

but are often underappreciated and poorly understood and celebrated

among Baptists. Their importance requires a thoroughness of consid­

eration that would unduly lengthen this chapter. Therefore, they will be

treated at length in the following chapter.

The Ministry of Service

Acts 2:45 records the radical way the early believers served one

another. To meet the financial needs of one another, they sold possessions

and even parcels of land. But it seems likely their service extended beyond

the boundaries of their own congregation. The love of Christ, as well as his

command, would prompt them to serve their neighbor, whether church

member or stranger. Paul commanded the early churches in Galatia to do

good to all, though he did underscore a special place for «those who belong

to the family of believers" (Gal. 6 : 1 0 ) . Perhaps the service they rendered

to all helps explain why Acts 2:47 says the early church was «enjoying the

favor of all the people:'

Service is also a necessary ministry of the church. The New Testament

is replete with texts describing how the love of Christ impels Christians

to serve others, following the example of their Lord, who did not come to

be served, but to serve (see Rom. 1 3 : 8 ; Gal. 5 : 1 3 ; 1 John 3 : 1 6 - 1 8 ) . As the

body of Christ, motivated by his love, the church from the earliest days has

provided service. Caring for the needs of members of the body is implicit

in the very idea of the church as Christ's body (see 1 Cor. 1 2 : 2 6 ) , but

because the church is the body of the Christ who came for all the world,

the service of the church extends to all the world. The idea of service is

also implicit in the image Christ applied to his followers, who are to be

«the salt of the earth" and «the light of the world" (Matt. 5 : 1 3 - 1 4 ) . The salt

and light exist to serve that which is in some sense opposed to them. Even

the ministry of worship is incomplete without the accompanying action of

service. Miroslav Volf says, «There is something profoundly hypocritical

THE MINISTRIES OF THE CHURCH 283

about praising God for God's mighty deeds of salvation and cooperating

at the same time with the demons of destruction, whether by neglecting to

do good or actively doing evil'?" The specific task of pastor-teachers is to

"prepare God's people for works of service" (Eph. 4 : 1 2 ) . While that word

service is broad enough to cover all that the church does in ministry, it

certainly includes the church's ministry to basic human needs, or what is

sometimes called social action.

Caring for the poor has a long heritage in the church. Paul testifies

that he was eager to do so ( Gal. 2: 1 0 ) . The patristic church was known for

its willingness to serve. An anonymous second-century letter describes

Christians in these terms: "They marry and have children just like every­

one else; but they do not kill unwanted babies. They offer a shared table,

but not a shared bed."? In the sixth century, Pope Gregory I earned the

title "Gregory the Great" in part because of the extensive provision he led

the church to make for the poor. One of the main motivations for the

various monastic movements throughout the medieval period was Iesus's

command to the rich young ruler to sell his possessions and give to the

poor (Matt. 1 9 : 2 1 ) , a command several rich Christians obeyed literally,

including Francis of Assisi.

By the time of the Reformation, the care of the poor and sick was seen

as a standard ministry of the church, typically entrusted to deacons. The

earliest description of Baptist worship includes "an exhortation to contrib­

ute to the poore, wch collection being made is also concluded wth prayer?"

Up until the 1 9 3 0 s , churches provided the major portion of social welfare

in the United States. Schools, hospitals, soup kitchens, and other care of

the poor and sick were all seen as a sphere of ministry of the church.

Perhaps the most extreme example of the commitment to service is seen

in the development of the so-called social gospel, whose foremost advo­

82
cate was a Baptist named Walter Rauschenbusch. Moved by the appalling

poverty that he saw in the Hell's Kitchen area of New York, Rauschenbusch

79. Miroslav Volf, "Reflections on a Christian Way of Being-in-the-World;' in Worship: Adoration

and Action, ed. D. A. Carson (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1993), 2 1 1 .

80. From the anonymous Letter to Diognetus, cited in Tim Dowley, ed., Introduction to the History

of Christianity (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2002), 67.

81. This reference is from 1609 and is cited in McBeth, Baptist Heritage, 9 1 . McBeth, in turn, is citing

Champlin Burrage, The Early English Dissenters in Light of Recent Research (New York: Russell

and Russell, 1967), 2:176-77.

82. For more on Rauschenbusch, see Stephen Brachlow, "Walter Rauschenbusch," in Baptist

Theologians, 366-83.
284 C H A P T E R 10

called for a radical commitment to the gospel, which for him involved a

commitment to social action on behalf of the poor. Because his theology

was suborthodox on many points (he denied the inerrancy of Scripture

and the deity of Christ, for example) and because he was firmly opposed to

American capitalism, Rauschenbusch did not gain a wide following. In fact,

many conservatives of his day criticized him as a communist, and the term

social gospel was associated with liberal theology. Perhaps, in overreaction

to Rauschenbusch, evangelical Christians backed away from some aspects

of service to society. George Marsden describes what he calls the "Great

Reversal:' which took place from around 1900 to 1930, "when all progres­

sive social concern, whether political or private, became suspect amongst

revivalist evangelicals and was relegated to a very minor role.?"

The poverty of the Great Depression overwhelmed the resources of

the churches. The government stepped in with the creation of the modern

welfare state, and increasingly has taken over the role formerly held by

the church in the areas of caring for the poor and sick. Still, anyone who

has served on the staff of a church knows that poor people still look to

churches for help, and most churches are involved in some way in minis­

tries providing assistance to those in need. One survey estimates that

Southern Baptist congregations alone minister to three million persons

per month through food and clothes closets, not to mention those who

volunteer as tutors in after-school programs and in providing meals and

84
transportation for the elderly. Earlier this century, two University of

Pennsylvania sociologists conducted a study of all the churches they could

contact in the city of Philadelphia, seeking to find out all the social minis­

tries being carried on by all these churches. After carefully evaluating and

trying to quantify the financial value of all that these churches were doing,

they concluded, "Conservatively, the financial replacement value of all

congregational social services in Philadelphia is $246,901,440 annually?"

Such service is motivated by the love of Christ.

While there is still a lot of room for improvement in this area, it

seems that the "Great Reversal" described by Marsden has at least seen

some movement back toward engagement with social ministries in recent

83. George Marsden, Fundamentalism and American Culture, new ed. (New York: Oxford University

Press, 2006), 86.

84. Jones, "Research Report;' 3-4.

85. Ram A. Cnaan and Stephanie C. Boddie, "Philadelphia Census of Congregations and Their

Involvement in Social Service Delivery;' Social Service Review 75, no. 4 (December 2001): 559-580.
THE MINISTRIES OF THE CHURCH 285

86
years, especially among younger evangelicals. Even more traditional

evangelicals affirm the importance of what Tim Keller has called «mercy

ministries.?" Few today would emphasize evangelism to the exclusion of

social action, or even legitimate only as a means to evangelism. While

88
the result of service may be an openness to the gospel, and while we

may and should give the highest priority to giving the greatest gift ( the

gospel), still service is legitimate in its own right, as an expression of

Christ's love, and should be offered unconditionally. Pastor Andy Davis

says, «every healthy congregation must be involved in mercy ministry,

both inside and outside the church.?" At the same time, I would want

to note that the ministry of service must be sustained by ministry to

and for those who are serving, ministries like teaching, fellowship and

worship." Finally, a point of special importance for resource-rich North

American churches is learning how to serve others, locally and globally,

in ways that truly help, without merely treating symptoms or creating

91
unhealthy financial dependence.

One helpful strategy for encouraging acts of service is through small,

purpose-oriented groups. We have mentioned small groups as important

contexts for the ministries of teaching and fellowship, but service can be

a helpful way to prevent small groups from just being inward-looking

holy huddles. Groups together can tackle projects and ministries that

could be overwhelming to an individual, and one catalyst for forming

a small group can be a shared desire on the part of several to serve in a

specific area of need.

86. An October 20, 2 0 1 5 article by Deborah Jian Lee reports on research by the Public Religion

Research Institute, showing that a growing minority of millennial evangelicals are supportive of

a variety of progressive, social justice issues. See Deborah Jian Lee, "Why the Young Religious

Right is Leaning Left;' http://time.com/ 4078909/ evangelical-millennials, accessed 7I5/2017.

87. Keller has written two influential books on the topic: Ministries of Mercy: The Call of the Jericho

Road (Phillipsburg, NJ: P & R, 1997 and Generous Justice: How God's Grace Makes Us Just (New

York: Dutton, 2010).

88. For one example of how bridges of service can lead unbelievers into the church, see Robert Lewis

with Rob Wilkins, The Church of Irresistible Influence (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001).

89. Davis, "Practical Issues in Deacon Ministry;' in Baptist Foundations, 328.

90. Jedd Medefind, "The Activist Soul: Why the Fight for Social Justice Must Start Within;'

Christianity Today (July/August 2 0 1 7 ) , 7 1 - 7 3 , notes a common story line among those who

become involved in justice ministries: waking, working, weary, withered. He concludes that the

love expressed in service needs to be sustained by a vital inner life, in which communal practices

are "immensely valuable" (73).

91. See the provocative, challenging, and helpful book, Steve Corbett and Brian Fikkert, When

Helping Hurts: How to Alleviate Poverty without Hurting the Poor . . . and Yourself ( Chicago:

Moody, 2009).
286 CHAPTER IO

The Ministry of Evangelism

The last ministry we find in the description of the church in Acts 2 is

not really described as a ministry of the church but as the activity of God.

As the church devoted itself to teaching its members, developing fellow­

ship, enjoying worship, and serving the community, the text says that "the

Lord added to their number" (v. 47). Richard Longenecker notes in his

commentary on Acts that the title the Lord (ho kurios) appears first in the
92
sentence, emphasizing its importance. Nor is this an unusual empha­

sis. While evangelism is everywhere present in almost every chapter of

the book of Acts, human actors are overshadowed by divine activity. In

Acts 6:7, "the word of God spread:' In Acts 9 : 3 1 , the church "increased in

numbers" as it was "encouraged by the Holy Spirit:' When Gentiles came

to believe, the church saw it as God granting to them "repentance that

leads to life" ( 1 1 : 1 8 ) . When Barnabas went to Antioch, he saw the converts

there as "what the grace of God had done" ( v. 2 3 ) . As Paul and Barnabas

preached, "The word of the Lord spread through the whole region" ( 1 3 : 4 9 ) .

When they returned from their missionary journey, Paul and Barnabas

reported that God "had opened the door of faith to the Gentiles" ( 1 4 : 2 7 ) .

Verses like these do not deny human involvement, but they underscore

the divine initiative.

Moreover, while there is obvious human involvement in sharing the

gospel message, there is almost a total absence of commands concerning

evangelistic involvement in the New Testament. Most books on evange­

lism give obedience to Christ's command as one of the chief motives for

evangelism, and give the Great Commission, Matthew 2 8 : 1 9 - 2 0 , as bibli­

cal support. But what is not often noted is that the command in the Great

Commission is to make disciples, which includes but is not exhausted by

evangelism, and that the command is one of a very small handful regard­
93
ing evangelism. Texts like Romans 1 2 : 9 - 2 1 and 1 Thessalonians 5 : 1 2 - 2 2

contain dozens of commands, but none that say anything like "share the

gospel with others" or "be zealous in evangelizing:' Likewise, the qualifi­

cations for elders in 1 Timothy 3: 1 - 7 and Titus 1 :6-9 show concern for

character and abilities to lead and teach, but there is no mention of gifted­

ness in evangelism. Yet this is not to say that evangelism is absent from the

92. Longenecker, "The Acts of the Apostles;' 9 : 2 9 1 .

93. See John Hammett, "The Great Commission and Evangelism in the New Testament;' Journal of

the American Society for Church Growth 10 (Fall 1999): 3 - 1 4 for elaboration of this point.
THE MINISTRIES OF THE CHURCH 287

pages of the New Testament. On the contrary, evangelism is everywhere

94
evidenced in the New Testament, but it is hardly ever commanded.

Of course, it is possible that the New Testament writers assumed that

the early Christians knew and would obey Christ's command in the Great

Commission, but the evidence seems otherwise. Michael Green says in

his classic study, Evangelism in the Early Church, that the three motives

energizing the evangelistic activity of the early believers were a sense of

love and gratitude to God, a sense of responsibility and stewardship before

God the Judge, and a sense of the dangerous condition of the lost. Green

adds, "It is important to stress this prior motive of loving gratitude to God

because it is not infrequently assumed that the direct command of Christ

to evangelize was the main driving force behind the Christian mission:'

but in fact Christ's command is quoted very rarely in Christian literature

of the second century and is referred to only once in the New Testament
95
writings themselves (Acts 10:42).

My point in noting the way the New Testament speaks of evangelism

is not to minimize the importance of obedience and intentionality in

evangelism. A recent survey of a thousand churches having a successful

ministry of evangelism found that a common factor in these churches was

"intentionality in evangelism.?" Rather, the implication we are to draw

from the New Testament is that evangelism should be a natural product of

a healthy church. In fact, if one thinks of God as the head of the heavenly

adoption agency, looking into families seeking to adopt new spiritual chil­

dren, why would he place them in dysfunctional families where they will

94. This was noticed long ago by Roland Allen, Missionary Methods: St. Paul's or Oursi, 2nd ed.

(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1962), 93, who writes of the letters of Paul, "There is one sentence

of approval, 'From you sounded out the word of the Lord; [1 Thess. 1:8] but there is no

insistence upon the command of Christ to preach the gospel:' Allen argues that new believers

felt compelled to share the new joy they had found and needed no command. Robert Plummer

believes that Paul assumed the congregations he had planted were sharing their faith; at a few

places Paul approves of or enjoins the "missionary activity of ordinary Christians:' But the most

powerful reason why ordinary Christians should preach the gospel is not command, but because

"they have been swept up into the triumphant advance of God's saving word" or "fallen into the

advance of the gospel's flooding advance:' Robert Plummer, "Paul's Gospel;' in Paul's Missionary

Methods: In His Time and Ours, eds. Robert Plummer and John Mark Terry (Downers Grove,

IL: IVP Academic, 2012), 52. See also Robert Plummer, Paul's Understanding of the Church's

Mission: Did the Apostle Paul Expect the Early Christian Communities to Evangelize? Paternoster

Biblical Monographs (Milton Keynes, UK: Paternoster, 2008).

95. Green, Evangelism in the Early Church, 236-55, 239.

96. Thom Rainer, "The Great Commission to Reach a New Generation;' The Southern Baptist

Journal of Theology 1 (Winter 1997): 40-50.

288 CHAPTER IO

not receive proper teaching, fellowship, worship, and service? But when

churches are healthy, evangelism seems to pop out irrepressibly, even in

the absence of the latest methodologies. Rick Warren says, "What really

attracts large numbers of unchurched to a church is changed lives-a lot

of changed lives. People want to go where lives are being changed, where

hurts are being healed, and where hope is being restored?" Mark Dever,

from a very different style of church, makes much the same observation:

"If you can get a reputation in the community as a church in which people's

lives are actually changed, you will begin to see some amazing things?"

Though hindered in their early years by persecution, and stunted at

times by hyper-Calvinistic theology, for most of their history Baptists in

America have been an evangelistic people. From 1 7 40 to 1848, Baptists

grew from less than one hundred churches to more than eleven thousand

churches, with more than 800,000 members. Such growth was not just the

result of a growing population in the United States; in fact, Baptists were

99
growing more than three times as fast as the population. By and large,

these Baptists were serious about their church membership, for if they

took it too lightly, churches regularly practiced church discipline.

However, as we discussed earlier, in the twentieth century, church

discipline nearly disappeared, standards for baptism and church member­

ship were relaxed, and the continuing growth in numbers did not neces­

sarily reflect effective evangelistic ministry. A significant portion of new

members eventually became inactive, and many active new members were

not new converts but transfers from other churches, a process sometimes

called "the circulation of the saints:' In recent years, some Baptist denomi­

nations have been in decline, including the largest Baptist denomina­

tion, the Southern Baptist Convention, despite a strong denominational

emphasis on evangelism.

If the understanding of the New Testament teaching on evangelism

sketched out above is correct, perhaps the reason for the lack of evange­

listic effectiveness lies in weaknesses in other ministries. And if this is so,

then the solution is not simply a stronger emphasis on evangelism, though

in all honesty that is also desperately needed. Rather, the solution will also

97. Warren, The Purpose Driven Church, 247. Emphasis in original.

98. Dever, "Pastoral Success in Evangelistic Ministry;' 255.

99. These numbers are from Noll, America's God, 162, 166, 1 8 1 . Noll cites Robert Baird, Religion

in the United States (Glasgow: n.p., 1844); and John Winebrenner, History of All the Religious

Denominations (Harrisburg, PA: n.p., 1848) as his sources.

THE MINISTRIES OF THE CHURCH 289

require the development of healthier churches with stronger ministries of

teaching, fellowship, worship, and service that, in turn, produce changed

lives. It is with such changed lives that intentional emphases on evange­

lism and practical training in evangelism produce results.

But even healthy Christians with changed lives will need to reckon

with the necessity of strong relationships for evangelistic effectiveness

in today's context.l'" While there may be some who respond to Christ

through some bold stranger knocking on their door and presenting the

claims of Christ, most will only become even interested enough to consider

the gospel in the context of relationships with Christians. Ed Stetzer says,

"With few exceptions people come to Christ after they've journeyed

with other Christians, examining them and considering their claims."?'

Tim Keller concurs: "most people in the West need to be welcomed into

community long enough for them to hear multiple expressions of the

gospel-both formal and informal-from individuals and teachers:' They

are "welcomed into community" and attracted enough to enter through

interactions with believers who have "relational integrity;' which Keller

defines as being "like those around us yet profoundly unlike them at the

102
same time, all the while remaining very visible and engaged:' Too often

the problem is that Christians are too like the nonbelievers around them,

and relationally distant, rather than engaged. For the Lord to add new

believers to churches today, believers will need to be healthy enough to

be unlike their non-believing neighbors and coworkers, but intentional

about loving them and relating to them not as evangelistic projects, but as

people genuinely valued as image-bearers of God.

One final aspect of evangelism merits special mention. It is the exten­

sion of evangelism to the ends of the earth, or what is usually called

international missions. This, too, has been a ministry very close to the

hearts of many Baptists. The man usually regarded as the father of the

modern missionary movement, William Carey, was a Baptist, and Baptists

in America formed their first national organization primarily to support

missions. Today, one exploding means of involvement for many thou-

100. Thom Rainer and Jess Rainer, The Millennials: Connecting to America's Largest Generation

(Nashville: B & H, 2 0 1 1 ) , 1 0 3 - 1 0 7 . On the basis of their research, this father-son team conclude

that relationships are the dominant motivation for Millennials in every area of life

101. Ed Stetzer, Planting Missional Churches (Nashville: B & H Academic, 2006), 188.

102. Tim Keller, Center Church: Doing Balanced, Gospel-Centered Ministry in Your City (Grand

Rapids: Zondervan, 2 0 1 2 ) , 2 8 1 - 8 2 . Italics in original.

290 CHAPTER IO

sands of people is a short-term mission trip. The number of those going

103
on such trips has multiplied from 120, 000 in 1 9 8 9 to 2,200,000 in 2006.

And while I have no more recent numbers, I have no reason to think the

number has significantly shrunk, though the rate of increase may well

have dropped. These are not always evangelistic trips. Some go to build

buildings, or dig wells, or offer various types of medical services. Such

trips would fall under the ministry of service, as just discussed. But many

do include a significant evangelistic component.

There is much to commend about this development. Many people are

exposed for the first time to the true needs of another part of the world and

begin to give sacrificially. Others are deeply moved and begin to consider

that obedience to the Great Commission might mean for them not simply

sending, praying for, and supporting others, but actually going. And this

is not to mention the significant good that such short-term teams can do.

Wells are dug; buildings are built; the sick do receive care; many lost people

hear the gospel-all things that may not have happened without the short­

term team. But there is a stewardship issue that needs consideration.

Airplane tickets are costly; providing food, lodging and translators

for foreigners is costly. Steve Corbett and Brian Fikkert observe that in

many parts of the world, "The money spent on a single STM [short-term

mission] team for a one to two-week experience would be sufficient to

support more than a dozen far more effective indigenous workers for an

entire year'"?' And in areas where there are no indigenous workers, such

funds may support a full-time missionary who could stay on the field,

learn the language, develop relationships and plant a church that could

then plant other churches.

This is not to call for a moratorium on short-term mission trips. Send­

ing money to support indigenous workers can also create unhealthy finan­

cial dependence, and some would say that the money spent on short-term

mission trips would not be given to missions at all otherwise. The latter

may be true; some people may be willing to give for a plane ticket for

themselves or a loved one who would never give to a missions organiza­

tion, but if true, it is sad and simply not good stewardship. The result that

should come from involvement in short-term trips is a deeper connec­

tion to, more passionate praying for, and increased giving to long- term

103. Corbett and Fikkert, When Helping Hurts, 1 5 1 .

104. Ibid., 1 6 1 .
THE MINISTRIES OF THE CHURCH 291

missionaries. If that is not the result of short-term trips, perhaps there are
105
ways they could be improved.

Over the past two centuries, the missionary enterprise supported by

Baptists and many others around the world has borne fruit and made

Christianity the first and only truly worldwide religion. There are still

many unreached peoples and areas that have been resistant to Christi­

anity, but the accomplishments of the missionary movement have been

remarkable yet largely unreported. Some seem to think that the influence

of Christianity is waning and that America is becoming a post-Christian

nation. That may or may not be true of America, but it is definitely not

the case worldwide. As Philip Jenkins has shown, the center of Christian­

ity may be moving from the Northern to the Southern Hemisphere, but

demographic evidence suggests that Christianity will continue to grow for

the foreseeable future.!" We will look at the implications of the globaliza­

tion of the church in more detail in chapter 1 3 .

In conclusion, these are the five mandated ministries of the church.

They are God's assignment to churches, inherent in the nature of the

church. This holistic assignment also distinguishes the church from para­

church groups that serve more specialized functions. By contrast, churches

are called to provide all five of these ministries to all types of peoples. That

is their challenge and their glory. Only as they keep all five in balance can

they be as healthy and fruitful as God intends them to be.

105. See "Suggestions for Improving the Impact of STMS:' in Corbett and Fikkert, When Helping

Hurts, 163-67.

106. See the fascinating analysis in Jenkins, The Next Christendom.

 C H A P T E R 1 1

M O RE THAN SIMPLE SYMBOLS

Baptism and the Lord's Supper

WE TURN NOW TO TWO important acts that have occasioned much discus­

sion, controversy, and division among churches in the course of history,

particularly following the Reformation. The first, baptism, provided the

name for Baptists, due to their distinctive practice of it. The second, the

Lord's Supper, remains the central act of worship in Catholic churches and

1
to a lesser degree in some other denominations.

Yet for all their importance, there seems to be a lack of interest in,

and even a sense of embarrassment concerning, these corporate acts of

commitment among Baptists. To some degree, this may be due to the

fact that Baptists have regarded these acts as symbolic and thus intrin­

sically less important than the realities they symbolize. Americans, on

the whole, seem less appreciative of ritual and symbolism than those of

many other cultures. Some in Baptist life have expressed regret at the

divisions caused by different perspectives on these acts and seem ready

1. For an extensive discussion of the views of Baptists and others on baptism and the Lord's Supper, see

John S. Hammett, 40 Questions about Baptism and the Lord's Supper (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2015).

293
294 CHAPTER 1 1

2
to revise traditional Baptist views to be more inclusive of others. The

minimizing of these rites is also reflected in the often sloppy, haphaz­

ard, dry celebration of them in Baptist churches. Rarely are they high

times of worship in Baptist life; rather, they are performed as part of

the tradition (in the case of communion, as infrequently as possible)

with little expectancy or joy. There is, thus, considerable need to rethink

Baptist views of baptism and the Lord's Supper, and considerable room

for improvement in Baptists, celebration of them.

INTRODUCTORY ISSUES

The Proper Terminology

We face an initial problem of terminology in discussing baptism and

the Lord's Supper: what should we call them? Books variously refer to

them as rites, rituals, ceremonies, and acts, but the word most often used

throughout Christian history has been sacrament. Sacramentum was the

word chosen in the Latin translation of the New Testament for the Greek

word mysterion, which, ironically, was never used in the New Testament

in connection with either baptism or the Lord's Supper. As a secular term,

a sacramentum was an oath of loyalty made by a Roman soldier to his

commander and thus was not totally alien to the meaning of baptism or

the Lord's Supper. However, as the Catholic Church developed its theol­

ogy and began to apply the word to certain practices, especially the Lord's

Supper, the meaning attributed to sacrament began to evolve.

2. The traditional Baptist insistence on believer's baptism by immersion as a condition for

membership in Baptist churches is being dropped by many Baptist churches in England (see

David Bebbington, Baptists through the Centuries: History of a Global People [Waco, TX: Baylor

University Press, 2010], 191; and Anthony Cross, Baptism and the Baptists: Theology and

Practice in Twentieth-Century Britain, Studies in Baptist History and Thought (Carlisle, UK

and Waynesboro, GA: Paternoster, 334-41) and by a much smaller number among Baptists

in North America (G. Todd Wilson, "Why Baptists Should Not Rebaptize Christians from

Other Denominations;' in Proclaiming the Baptist Vision: Baptism and the Lord's Supper, ed.

Walter Shurden [Macon, GA: Smyth & Helwys, 1 9 9 9 ] , 5:41-48; and John Piper, "Response to

Grudem on Baptism and Church Membership;' at http://desiringgod.org/blog/Posts/response­

to-grudem-on-baptism-abd-church-membership/print [ accessed 7/6/ 17] ). The traditional

Baptist insistence on believer's baptism as a condition for participation in the Lord's Supper has

been even more widely abandoned, with only 35 percent of Southern Baptist pastors surveyed

saying their church limits participation to those baptized as a believer (see Carol Pipes, "Lifeway

Surveys Lord's Supper Practices of SBC Churches;' at http://www.lifeway.com/ Article/research­

survey-lords-supper-practices-sbc-churches [ accessed 6/ 1 5 / 2 0 1 7 ] ) .
MORE THAN SIMPLE SYMBOLS 295

Perhaps the most well-known definition of sacrament is that given by

3
Augustine: a visible sign of an invisible grace. More problematic was the

growing assertion that the sacraments conveyed God's grace to the recipient.

By the time of the Reformation, the sacraments were thought to communi­

cate grace in an almost mechanical way. The phrase used to refer to this view

is ex opere operato, «from the work done:' The meaning is that the sacrament

conveys grace by the mere fact that is it properly done, apart from faith on

the part of the recipient. For example, the Council of Trent, meeting in 154 7,

promulgated this decree: «If anyone says that by the sacraments of the new

law grace is not conferred ex opere operato, but that faith alone in the divine

promise is sufficient to obtain grace, let him be anathema." This, of course,

was written to counter the claim of Luther and the Reformers as a whole

that we receive grace by faith. Even today, a prominent Catholic theology

text defines sacrament as «a sign through which the Church manifests and

celebrates its faith and communicates the saving grace of God,"

Today, most Protestants use the word sacraments for these acts and

can even describe the sacraments as «means of grace;' but without the
6
idea that they are salvific or convey grace apart from faith. Early Baptists

used the terms sacraments and ordinances interchangeably, but in the

eighteenth and especially in the nineteenth century, opposition developed

among Baptists to the use of the term «sacrament;' due to concern that

the term connoted the transmission of saving grace to recipients apart

7
from faith, and thus threatened the doctrine of justification by faith.

Opposition to the term «sacrament" continues for many Baptists today,

but is weakening some. Gregg Allison may reflect a growing trend among

Baptists in stating, «Out of deference to evangelicals who use both terms,

3. See Augustine, "On the Catechising of the Uninstructed;' in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers,

First Series, ed. Philip Schaff (New York: Christian Publishing, 1887; reprint, Peabody, MA:

Hendrickson, 1994), 3 : 3 1 3 (ch. 26.50).

4. Canon 8 from the "Canons on the Sacraments in General;' in Janz, ed., A Reformation Reader, 359.

5. McBrien, Catholicism, 1250.

6. Wayne Grudem defines the means of grace as "any activities within the fellowship that God uses

to give more grace to Christians;' and specifically includes what he calls "the two sacraments"

within those means of grace. See Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical

Doctrine (Leicester, UK: Inter-Varsity/Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994), 950. Emphasis in original.

7. David Bebbington (Baptists through the Centuries, 177-95) and Stanley Fowler (More 1han A

Symbol: 1he British Baptist Recovery of Baptismal Sacramentalism, Studies in Baptist History

and Thought, vol. 2 [Carlisle, UK and Waynesboro, GA: Paternoster, 2002], 10-88) trace these

developments, with Bebbington offering five possible reasons for the change and Fowler six, but

both see anti-Catholicism as an important aspect.

296 CHAPTER 1 1

I will refer to these rites as both sacraments and ordinances, though I

personally prefer the latter term."

Neither term can claim biblical warrant; indeed, there is no specific

biblical term used for these rites. Thus, one can use rite, ritual, ceremony,

act, celebration, sacrament, or ordinance; what matters is the meaning one

attaches. Most Baptists, at least in the North American context, still attach

troubling associations to the term sacrament and prefer ordinance, and I

will use that term most often in this chapter and book. But I would want

to challenge one understanding of ordinance. Leonard Vander Zee sees

these terms as reflecting what he calls the "great divide" in interpretations

of baptism and the Lord's Supper: "On the one side are those for whom the

sacramental signs merely point to God and invite our faith in him but do

not involve any action on God's part. On the other side, God uses the signs

to point us to Christ and bind us to him:' He associates the former with

the term "ordinances" and the latter with "sacraments." Vander Zee may

be accurate; probably many use the term ordinance to avoid any implica­

tion that God acts salvifically in baptism or the Lord's Supper. But I do not

think that using the term ordinance means that one cannot see God as

acting in other non-saving ways in baptism and the Lord's Supper. Later

in this chapter I will suggest what some such ways may be.

The Proper Number

Baptism and the Lord's Supper have been almost universally recognized

as ordinances given to the church by Christ; among the churches growing

out of the Reformation, they have been regarded as the only true sacra­
10
ments. Among Catholics, while these two have been strongly affirmed,

they have not been the only sacraments. Augustine used the word sacra­

mentum for the Lord's Prayer and the Creed, another medieval theologian
11
specified as many as thirty sacraments, and contemporary Catholic theo­

logian Richard McBrien says that one of the essential aspects of Catholicism

is its "sacramental vision" in which virtually anything can become a "carrier

of the divine presence?" The traditional formulation, which dates from at

8. Allison, Sojourners and Strangers, 322.

9. Leonard Vander Zee, Christ, Baptism and the Lord's Supper: Recovering the Sacraments for

Evangelical Worship (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2004), 30.

10. The only exceptions are the Quakers and the Salvation Army, which observe no sacraments.

11. F. L. Cross and E. A. Livingstone, eds., "Sacrament;' in Cross and Livingstone, eds., Oxford

Dictionary of the Christian Church, 1 2 1 8 .

12. McBrien, Catholicism, 10.

MORE THAN SIMPLE SYMBOLS 297

least the twelfth century, sees seven sacraments: baptism, confirmation,

the Eucharist or the Lord's Supper, penance, matrimony, holy orders, and

13
extreme unction ( also called last rites or anointing of the sick). The East­

ern Orthodox Church also recognizes seven sacraments, but uses slightly

different terminology for the five other than baptism and the Lord's Supper

14
( chrismation, repentance, ordination, marriage, and holy unction).

The criteria by which the Reformers ( and Baptists) have limited the

number of ordinances to two have been: ( 1 ) they must have been directly

instituted by Christ, and (2) they must be directly related to the gospel;

that is, they must "depict in a symbolic manner the central story of Jesus

and our union with him?" On these grounds, they have maintained that

only baptism and the Lord's Supper qualify. The Council of Trent claimed

that Christ instituted all seven of the Catholic sacraments, but attempts

to find such occasions in the New Testament have led to disagreements

16
among Catholic theologians themselves. Robert Saucy is more blunt,

claiming that it is impossible to find a biblical basis for any ordinances

other than baptism and the Lord's Supper," Some Baptists have argued

for foot washing as an ordinance. It was instituted by Christ, but has been

seen as relating more to how Christians should serve one another than to

the gospel, and thus has never been widely accepted as an ordinance.

The Proper Administrator

The question of the proper administrator of the sacraments is raised

mainly by the idea that ordination gives to the one ordained special rights

or powers. For example, in Roman Catholicism, it is only when a properly

ordained priest says the words, "This is my body;' that God performs the

miracle of transubstantiation, whereby the bread and wine become the

actual body and blood of Christ. As officers of the church, the priests are

13. For more on the development and definition of the list of seven sacraments in Catholicism, in

which Peter Lombard was a key figure, see Alister McGrath, Historical Theology: An Introduction

to the History of Christian Thought (Oxford, UK and Malden, MA: Blackwell, 1998), 120, 139-43;

and Hammett, 40 Questions about Baptism and the Lord's Supper, 25-32.

14. See John Karmiris, "Concerning the Sacraments;' in Eastern Orthodox Theology: A Contemporary

Reader, ed. Daniel Clendenin ( Grand Rapids: Baker, 1995), 22: and The Living God: A Catechism

for the Christian Faith, trans. Ola Dunlop (Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1989),

2:xx-xxi.

15. Grenz, Theology for the Community of God, 676.

16. Cross and Livingstone, "Sacrament;' 1 2 1 8 .

17. Saucy, The Church in God's Program, 192.

298 CHAPTER 1 1

the ones that manage the grace conveyed through the sacraments. There­

fore, they are the ones who must perform the sacraments.

The Reformers, and Luther in particular, championed the principle of

the priesthood of all believers. Yet they maintained the propriety of only

pastors administering the sacraments for the sake of order. Luther says,

"what would happen if everyone wanted to speak or administer, and no

one wanted to give way to the other? It must be entrusted to one person,

and he alone should be allowed to preach, to baptize, to absolve, and

to administer the sacraments,":" More recently, Louis Berkhof has gone

beyond the proper administrator simply being a matter of order, reason­

ing from the idea that baptism and the Lord's Supper are among the offi­

cial means of grace given by God to the church: "As the official means of

grace placed at the disposal of the Church, both the Word and the sacra­

ments can only be administered by the lawful and properly qualified officers

of the Church?" But it seems equally possible to take Berkhof s premise

( that the ordinances are given to the church as official means of grace)

to lead to a different conclusion: therefore, they may be administered by

anyone the church designates.

In most cases, the obvious persons for the church to designate are its

leaders. But there is no reason why someone must be ordained to admin­

ister baptism or the Lord's Supper. It may be wise to give some instruction

to those baptizing or administering the Lord's Supper for the first time, but

all that would seem necessary from a Baptist or congregational perspec­

tive would be congregational approval. Thus, in many Baptist churches

it is not uncommon to see a father baptizing his own son, and I would

see no theological problem with a mother baptizing her daughter, or in

other cases, having the person most instrumental in a person's conversion

to administer the baptism. I think it would be wise to have some pasto­

ral instruction and supervision, and important to have congregational

approval, but any limitation of administrators to ordained persons seems

to go beyond Scripture and contrary to the principle of the priesthood of

all believers and congregationalism. But this argument rests on the prem­

ise that the ordinances are given in a special sense to local churches, which

leads to the next question.

18. Martin Luther, "On the Councils and the Church;' in Luther, Basic Theological Writings, 5 5 1 .

19. Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1939), 6 1 0 . Emphasis in original.
MORE THAN SIMPLE SYMBOLS 299

The Proper Setting

There is widespread agreement that the administration of the ordi­

nances belongs to local churches. This agreement is based on a number of

factors. First, the command to baptize (Matt. 2 8 : 1 9 - 2 0 ) was given to the

apostles not as independent individuals, but as the authorized leaders of

the early church. New Testament descriptions of baptism and the Lord's

Supper seem to assume that these activities normally take place in the

context of a church, or in the case of some baptisms, at the beginning stage

20
of a church's establishment (as in Acts 2 : 4 1 ; 8 : 1 2 ; 1 6 : 1 5 ) .

More important, as will be argued below, the meanings of baptism and

the Lord's Supper link both to the church. Stanley Grenz says, "the mean­

ing of the sacred practices lies in their use as acts of commitment within

the context of the community of Jesus' disciples"; they are the means by

which "we initially affirm and repeatedly reaffirm our inclusion in the

community'?' Millard Erickson notes that virtually all Christians agree

that baptism is connected "with one's initiation into the universal, invis­

ible church as well as the local, visible church.?" In the case of the Lord's

Supper, the connection is even clearer. The key text on the Lord's Supper,

1 Corinthians 1 1 : 17-34, speaks of the church meeting or coming together

(sunerkomai) for this purpose five times in this brief passage. Clearly, it is

an act "to be celebrated by the assembled church" rather than "a solitary

observance on the part of individuals.?"

In addition to biblical and theological reasons, there are practical

reasons why most parachurch groups and interdenominational groups leave

the ordinances to local churches. In such gatherings, there will normally be

a variety of understandings of these acts. Observing them would promote

confusion rather than worship. Also, most parachurch groups seek to minis­

ter alongside (para) churches rather than in competition with them. The

ordinances are normally seen as belonging to the church.

This does not mean that there can be no ordinances observed except

in a church building. Outdoor baptisms are practiced by many churches

in lakes and provide a wonderful opportunity for public testimony. But the

20. The only clear example of a baptism that does not seem connected in any way to an established

or beginning church is that of the Ethiopian eunuch in Acts 8:36-39, but there are a number of

elements in this account that mark it as an exception, rather than the rule.

21. Grenz, Theology for the Community of God, 673.

22. Erickson, Christian Theology, 1 0 1 7 .

23. Strong, Systematic Theology, 961.

300 CHAPTER 1 1

ordinances involve commitment to a body of believers (in baptism) and

renewal of that commitment (in the Lord's Supper) and thus cannot be

properly observed in a context unrelated to a church. They are not appro­

priate for loosely related groups like those found, for example, on a youth
24
retreat, or a small portion of the church, like a home Bible study. Perhaps

the most common non-church setting is a wedding, in which a couple

want to have their first act as a married couple to be partaking of the Lord's

Supper. It is not that such celebrations of the Lord's Supper or baptism

are sinful. They simply cannot, by their nature, embody the full meaning

of baptism and the Lord's Supper, for that meaning is tied to the church.

However, in situations where a church member is unable to attend public

worship, the Lord's Supper may be carried to such a one by representatives

of the church and would in fact be an important way for such a one to

affirm that, though separated physically from the body of believers, she or

he remains committed and one with them in spirit. But the normal setting

for observation of the ordinances is the gatherings of the church.

The Proper Perspective

The final issue in this preliminary overview is that of perspective.

Before we turn to the individual ordinances and the meaning of each,

we should notice an interesting dualism of perspectives that colors one's

interpretation of the ordinances. We alluded to this dualism earlier under

the discussion of the proper terminology, what Leonard Vander Zee calls

«the great divide;' between those who see baptism and the Lord's Supper as

«means of expressing faith to God;' and those who see them as «a means of

25
receiving grace from God:' Another way of putting it is asking, who acts

when we observe baptism and the Lord's Supper? Is it just humans who

testify to faith, who do this in remembrance of Christ, who proclaim the

Lord's death until he comes, or is God also at work in these observances?

Vander Zee associates the term "ordinances" with those who focus on the

human actor, and "sacraments" with those who see some divine action,

and while there may be some historical correlation, such differentiation of

meaning is not inherent in the terms themselves.

24. There seems to be increasing online discussions of this issue with some large churches

encouraging celebration of the Lord's Supper in small groups, and others affirming that the

setting of a baptism does not matter. See Hammett, 40 Questions about Baptism and the Lord's

Supper, 42-44.

25. Vander Zee, Christ, Baptism and the Lord's Supper, 30.
MORE THAN SIMPLE SYMBOLS 301

Some see the ordinances as places where God acts. He ministers help

and encouragement; he seals and confirms. He is there in blessing, and the

ordinances can be means of grace- not the grace that saves, but that which

strengthens and upholds a believer. If not carefully qualified, this position

can veer toward an ex opere operato view and thus we must maintain that the

ordinances do not automatically dispense grace but must be met with faith.

On the other hand, Baptists typically emphasize the human actions

involved in the ordinances. At baptism, we emphasize that those who are

coming are coming to testify of their faith in Christ. They are the actors.

They are buried; they are raised. Likewise in the Lord's Supper, we remem­

ber Christ's body broken and his blood spilled for us. We proclaim Christ's

death. The focus is on what we do. But there is no reason to exclude God

acting in the ordinances as well. The danger here is missing a blessing God

may have for us, because we never look for it.

Both perspectives have a part in the ordinances. In addition to the

traditional Baptist emphasis on human action, this chapter also points out

how God is active around us in the ordinances and how we may seek to

receive his blessing.

BAPTISM: THE ORDINANCE

OF CONVERSION/INITIATION

In some ways it is ironic, yet understandable, that the opponents of

Baptists chose to identify them by the term Baptists. It is ironic because the

more fundamental idea prompting the origin of Baptists was their idea of

the church as a pure body composed of believers only. It is understandable

because their practice of baptism was the most obvious and visible expres­

sion of their idea of the church. Baptists differed most visibly in the subjects

and mode of baptism. That is, they baptized no infants, but only those of an

age to make a credible decision of faith, and they baptized them by immer­

sion, not sprinkling. But underlying these visible differences was their view

of the meaning of baptism. It is to that topic that we turn our attention first.

The Meaning of Baptism

Millard Erickson rightly says, "It is almost universally agreed that

baptism is in some way connected with the beginning of the Christian

life" He himself calls it "the initiatory rite of the church?" But baptism

26. Erickson, Christian Theology, 1 0 1 6 - 1 7 .

302 CHAPTER 1 1

links initiation and conversion, for baptism is linked to all the other

components involved in the process of becoming a Christian. Robert Stein

sees baptism as one of five "integrally related components" found in the

accounts of conversion in the book of Acts: "repentance, faith, confession,

receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit, and baptisrn.?" Leonard Vander Zee

goes further, bluntly claiming that baptism "is used almost interchange­

28
ably with conversion, regeneration, and salvation itself:' G. R. Beasley­

Murray, in one of the most important studies of baptism, insists that "in

the New Testament precisely the same gifts of grace are associated with faith

as with baptism"?' But what is it about baptism that makes it appropri­

ate to associate with initiation/ conversion? There seem three aspects of its

meaning that justify this association.

The first way that baptism came to be associated with initiation/

conversion is the idea of cleansing, which is one of the major uses of

water. As Beasley-Murray observes, "Cleansing is the primary meaning

30
of baptism in all religious groups that have practiced it:' Of course, it

is not the washing of dirt from the body that is in view in baptism ( see 1

Petere3:21), but cleansing from sin. Thus, Ananias commands Paul, "Get

up, be baptized and wash your sins away, calling on his name" (Acts 2 2 : 1 6 ) .

The second way that baptism is associated with initiation/ conversion is

that it signifies identification with Christ and union with Christ. This is seen

in the baptismal formula, being baptized "in ( or 'into') the name of Jesus

Christ?" Such a formula implies a transfer of ownership, as when money

is deposited in a bank "in the name of" a certain person. The one baptized

confesses the name as an expression of trust and allegiance; the name is

invoked over the one baptized, in recognition of Christ's authority. Paul, in

his teaching on baptism in Romans 6 : 3 - 1 0 , sees baptism as involving union

with Christ in his death, burial and resurrection. Similarly, in Galatians 3:27,

being baptized "into Christ" is explained as having "clothed yourselves with

27. Robert Stein, "Baptism in Luke-Acts;' in Believer's Baptism: Sign of the New Covenant in

Christ, eds. Thomas Schreiner and Shawn Wright, NAC Studies in Bible and Theology, ed. Ray

Clendenen (Nashville: B & H Academic, 2006), 52.

28. Vander Zee, Christ, Baptism and the Lord's Supper, 85.

29. G. R. Beasley-Murray, Baptism in the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1962), 272.

Emphasis on original.

30. Ibid., 104.

31. The wording of the formula varies slightly, from "in the name of the Lord Jesus" (Acts 2:38,

10:48) to "into Christ" (Rom. 6:3; Gal. 3:27) to the fuller formula, "in the name of the Father and

of the Son and of the Holy Spirit ( only in Matt. 28: 1 9 ) . For the meaning, see Lars Hartman, 'Into

the Name of the Lord Jesus': Baptism in the Early Church (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1997), 44-50.
MORE THAN SIMPLE SYMBOLS 303

Christ:' which, F. F. Bruce says, is "another way of expressing incorporation

into him?" Baptism means that we are identified with and united to Christ.

A third aspect of the meaning of baptism comes as a consequence of

the second. One cannot be identified with Jesus without also being iden­

tified with his people. Joseph Hellerman calls salvation "a community­

creating event" and argues that conversion involves "both our justification

and our familification?" This is seen in the order of events in Acts 2 : 4 1 ,

where those who believed the message "were baptized" and "were added"

to the body of believers. Admittedly, this is not always obvious in all the

examples in the book of Acts, for in many cases, those being baptized were

the founding members of the church in their area. There was no already­

existing church for them to be added to. 1 Corinthians 1 2 : 1 3 explicitly

links baptism and incorporation into the body of Christ, but there is some

disagreement about whether the baptism referred to is Spirit baptism or

34
water baptism. The latter is the majority view, but simply the insepa­

rable connection of Christ to his body has been enough to lead almost all

Christian groups down through history to see baptism into Christ as also
35
involving initiation into his body, the church.

While some add further elements to the meaning of baptism beyond

36
these three, these three seem most clearly to express the meaning of

baptism. What has not been as clear has been the precise relationship

of baptism to purification, identification with Christ, and incorporation

into his body. Typically, Baptists have seen baptism as symbolic; that is,

baptism does not itself effect or accomplish purification, identification or

incorporation, but symbolizes that they have been accomplished by faith.

Faith is the reality; baptism is the symbol of faith, testifying to what faith

has accomplished. But in the latter half of the twentieth century a number

32. F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Galatians, New International Greek Testament Commentary

Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982), 186.

33. Hellerman, When the Church Was a Family, 143.

34. Beasley-Murray argues for water baptism, the majority view (Baptism in the New Testament,

167-71); James Dunn advocates the opposing view (Baptism in the Holy Spirit [Philadelphia:

Westminster, 1970], 129). For a survey of more recent scholarship on this text, see A. C. Thiselton,

The First Epistle to the Corinthians, NIGNT (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000), 997-1001.

35. For affirmations of this understanding by Catholics, Lutherans, Presbyterians, and Baptists, see

Hammett, 40 Questions about Baptism and the Lord's Supper, 120. For an argument that baptism

is required for church membership, see Bobby Jamieson, Going Public: Why Baptism Is Required

for Church Membership (Nashville: B & H Academic, 2015).

36. Vander Zee sees seven "main themes" in New Testament teaching on baptism ( Christ, Baptism

and the Lord's Supper, 85); Allison distinguishes five aspects of baptism's meaning (Sojourners

and Strangers, 357).

304 CHAPTER 1 1

of British Baptists have argued for a more "sacramental" understanding

of baptism; that is, a view that sees baptism as that which "mediates the

experience of salvific union with Christ:' In other words, "one submits to

baptism as a penitent sinner in order to experience the forgiveness of sins

and the gift of the Holy Spirit, rather than as a confirmed disciple in order

to bear witness to a past experience of union with Christ?"

Beasley-Murray is seen by many as the pioneer of this position. He

does not deny that baptism is a symbol, but it is "a symbol with power, that

is, a sacrament'?" He does not say that baptism is necessary, for it is Christ

who saves, not baptism. But he does say, "It behooves us accordingly to

make much of baptism. It is given as the trysting place of the sinner with
39
the Saviour; he who has met Him there will not despise if'

I do not find this position fully convincing. I think any overall read­

ing of the New Testament shows the priority of faith in salvation. Even

in the texts that most closely associate baptism and salvation (Acts 2 : 3 8

and 1 Peter 3 : 2 1 ) , "faith is either imputed or explicitly stated along with

baptism.':" and there are many texts where conversion occurs and baptism

is not mentioned. But I think these fellow Baptists may be alerting us to

the possibility of seeing baptism, not just as something we do, but some­

thing in which God is active. It may be given to us, not to effect salvation,

but "to confirm the realities of salvation.?" Wayne Grudem lists baptism

among the "means of grace" by which God may deepen our assurance of
42
salvation and increase our realization of the power of Christ's life in us.

Though John Calvin would differ from Baptists in his understanding of

baptism, I find his definition of sacrament consonant with the New Testa­

ment evidence. He says, a sacrament "is an outward sign by which the

Lord seals on our consciences the promises of his good will toward us in

order to sustain the weakness of our faith; and we in turn attest our piety

toward him in the presence of the Lord and of his angels and before men?"

37. Stanley Fowler, More Than a Symbol: The British Baptist Recovery of Baptismal Sacramentalism,

Studies in Baptist History and Thought (Carlisle, UK: Paternoster, 2002), 2:6. Fowler has been

the most persistent defender of this position. This is his most complete presentation and

defense of it.

38. Beasley-Murray, Baptism in the New Testament, 263.

39. Ibid., 305.

40. Saucy, Church in God's Program, 197.

41. Ibid., 198.

42. Grudem, Systematic Theology, 953-54.

43. Calvin, Institutes, 2 1 : 1 2 7 7 ( 4 . 1 4 . 1 ) .

MORE THAN SIMPLE SYMBOLS 305

I would state the last part more strongly to include the idea of testifying

to faith, but I think the first part states what God may do in baptism well.

I am not convinced that God bestows the same blessing in every case

of baptism, but I want us to be open and expectant that since God has

ordained baptism for our blessing, when we act in believing obedience

to what he has ordained, we can expect him to act toward us in bless­

ing. It may be in confirmation or assurance or empowering, but God

has ordained baptism for a reason, and we may expect him to act in and

through it. I use the verb "ordain" here because I think such an under­

standing can fit as well with baptism as an ordinance as a sacrament.

I think God uses tangible, physical symbols like water because we are

physical, sense-bound creatures. The decision to trust Christ for salva­

tion is something that happens on a spiritual level, in the heart (Rom.

1 0 : 1 0 ) , but we need some way to make that internal decision external

and concrete. That is why we often ask people to respond to the gospel

in an external way. It may be "walking down the aisle" or "saying the

sinner's prayer:' We warn people that such acts don't save, but they make

the invisible decision of faith visible and concrete. I do not oppose either

of these practices, but I do think baptism is the appointed sign by which

we make our faith visible, and I think God is pleased when we use the

means he has ordained.

A lovely analogy is provided by marriage. Faith may be compared to

the love that binds two people together. It develops internally and leads

two people to make a commitment to each other. The wedding is the occa­

sion where that love is publicly celebrated, confessed, and confirmed. It

does not create the love, but it expresses and seals it in a beautiful and

solemn way. Likewise, baptism does not create faith or union with Christ,
44
but it confesses, celebrates, and confirms it. It is the occasion when one,

almost literally, takes the plunge.

In summary, baptism is the ordinance of conversion/initiation. It

reflects and symbolizes purification from sin, union and identification

with Christ, and initiation and incorporation into the church. As God's

ordained means of testifying to faith, we may expect God to act in blessing

when we believingly obey his command.

44. Grenz, Theology for the Community of God, 685, also notes the usefulness of marriage as an

analogy.
306 CHAPTER 1 1

Who May Be Baptized?

The proper subjects for baptism is the topic that has most dominated

discussions of baptism in the past five hundred years. By the time of the

Reformation, infant baptism had been practiced for more than a thousand

years. It was one of the ways in which church and state were united; every

citizen of the state was made a member of the church via infant baptism. The

union of church and state was seen as essential to societal order and cohesion,

and so infant baptism had theological, political, and social ramifications.

Reformation theology had challenged the sacramental theology that

saw the Lord's Supper as channeling grace to the recipients in an automatic

(ex opere operato) manner, insisting that God's grace is given to those who

come to God by faith. Apart from faith, the sacraments have no value.

Such a view raised natural questions about the validity of infant baptism,

for it is difficult to demonstrate that infants are believers when baptized. It

45
is true that Luther argued that infants can and do have faith, but few have

found his argument convincing. More common ways to link faith and the

baptism of infants have been to see their baptism as looking to future faith,

or to see their baptism as justified by the faith of others ( either the parents

or the church) exercised on their behalf. In the first case, the difficulty is

that this makes the value of their baptism conditional and raises the ques­

tions, what of the baptism of those infants who do not come to faith? Was

it, after all, a mistake to baptize them? What did God do when they were

baptized? In the second case, the idea that someone may have faith on

behalf of another seems contrary to one of the core beliefs of evangelical

Christians: that Christianity involves a personal relationship with Christ,

46
not a relationship via proxy.

Moreover, the Reformation concern to base all of theology on Scrip­

ture alone also raised questions about infant baptism. The earliest Anabap­

tists and later Baptists challenged infant baptism because they could not

find it in Scripture. Indeed, one of the most common reasons for conver­

sion to Baptist views down through history has been the perceived biblical

support for the Baptist position on baptism. With such theological and

45. Martin Luther, "Concerning Rebaptism," in LW 40, 254-57. Yet Luther says that even if infants

don't have faith, infant baptism is still valid, for faith can come later. Baptists have responded

that since we don't know which will or will not come to faith, we should wait until faith becomes

evident to baptize them.

46. Jewett says that the idea that a sponsor can have faith for a child "is wholly without warrant in

the Scripture and repugnant to the fundamental truth that no one can receive and rest upon

Christ for salvation by proxy" (Jewett, Infant Baptism, 184).

MORE THAN SIMPLE SYMBOLS 307

biblical questions, how had infant baptism become dominant? What argu­

ments can be adduced in its favor?

There are hints at a developing practice of infant baptism by the end of

the second century, with Origen claiming apostolic warrant for it in an oral
47
tradition. However, other churches still required a period of instruction

( the catechumenate) prior to baptism, and thus were practicing something

close to believer's baptism. As on many other issues, the influence of Augus­

tine was decisive on this issue. Around 400, he gave the classic justifica­

tion for infant baptism, as that which washes away the stain of original sin.

Moreover, Augustine taught that infants who die without receiving infant

baptism are forever barred from heaven. Thereafter, infant baptism became

48
the norm. By the time of the Reformation, infant baptism was deeply

ingrained in society and was the unquestioned assumption of the church. In

fact, Luther, who on other issues challenged tradition in the name of Scrip­

ture, used tradition to argue for infant baptism against the Anabaptists.

He said that if infant baptism was not valid, "it would follow that for more

than a thousand years there was no baptism or any Christendom, which is

impossible?" As mentioned above, Luther also postulated the existence of

infant faith, but the major arguments for infant baptism have come from

Zwingli, Calvin, and the Reformed branch of Christendom.

One often-mentioned support for the idea of infant baptism is the

household baptisms mentioned in Acts 10:44-48; 16:33-34; 18:8; and

1 Corinthians 1 : 1 6 . Since the whole household was baptized in each case,

advocates of infant baptism (or paedobaptists) argue that it is probable

that at least some of the households included infants." But G. R. Beasley­

Murray has shown that a close examination of the texts in question raises

doubts about the presence of infants, for the members of the households are

described as hearing the message of the gospel, receiving the Spirit, speak-

47. Two classic works which trace the historical evidence for the emergence of infant baptism are

Joachim Jeremias, Infant Baptism in the First Four Centuries, trans. David Cairns (London: SCM

Press, 1960) and Kurt Aland, Did the Early Church Baptize Infants? trans. G. R. Beasley-Murray

(London: SCM Press, 1963). See the review of their debate in David Wright, Infant Baptism

in Historical Perspective: Collected Studies, Studies in Christian History and Thought (Milton

Keynes, UK and Waynesboro, GA: Paternoster, 2007), 4-20. For a summary of the evidence, see

Hammett, 40 Questions about Baptism and the Lord's Supper, 1 3 1 - 3 4 .

48. David Wright says, "More than any other factor, Augustine's anti- Pelagian theology universalized

infant baptism in the West" (Infant Baptism, xxvii).

49. Luther, "Concerning Rebaptisrn," 256.

50. See Jonathan Watt, "The Oikos Formula:' in The Case for Covenantal Infant Baptism, ed. Gregg

Strawbridge (Phillipsburg, NJ: P & R, 2003), 84.

308 CHAPTER 1 1

51
ing in tongues, praising God, and most important of all, as believing. If

the infants believed, then they were certainly appropriate candidates for

baptism, but the context strongly implies that infants were not present.

Another argument is sometimes made from the account in the

Gospels of children being brought to Jesus (Matt. 1 9 : 1 3 - 1 5 ; Mark 1 0 : 1 3 -

1 6 ; Luke 1 8 : 1 5 - 1 7 ) . But here, too, careful attention to the text shows that

the parents brought their children to be blessed by Jesus, and to have him

52
touch them and pray for them, but not to be baptized.

However, the most important and distinctive argument for infant

53
baptism comes from Reformed teaching on the covenant of grace. Some

paedobaptists will acknowledge that there is no clear example of the

baptism of infants in the New Testament. They think that this is due to the

pioneer missionary situation in the New Testament. Once churches had

been established and Christian families began to have children, they think

infant baptism was appropriate and defend the practice with what is called

the covenantal case for infant baptism. While different Reformed theolo­

gians develop the argument in slightly different ways, the central ideas are

54
clear and command wide agreement among Reformed theologians. The

argument is from continuity in the covenants through which God deals

with his people down through history. As children were brought into the

Abrahamic covenant community through the sign of circumcision, given

to infants, so the children of believing parents today are brought into the

new covenant community through the covenant sign of baptism, which

51. Beasley-Murray, Baptism in the New Testament, 3 1 2 - 1 6 .

52. Paul Jewett notes that the words of Jesus in this text concerning not hindering the children from

coming to him "have been quoted or summarized in virtually every order of worship for the

giving of baptism to infants ever prepared under Lutheran, Anglican, Presbyterian, Reformed,

Congregational or Methodist auspices" (Infant Baptism and the Covenant of Grace, 56). But

recognizing the weakness of this argument, contemporary paedobaptists have backed off from

using it. See Hammett, 40 Questions about Baptism and the Lord's Supper, 134-35.

53. Interestingly, in developing this argument Zwingli acknowledged that he was taking "a different

path from that taken either by ancient or more modern writers or by our own contemporaries"

(Ulrich Zwingli, "Of Baptism;' in Zwingli and Bullinger, trans. and ed. G. W Bromiley, LCC

[Philadelphia: Westminster, 1953, 130]). I thank Gregg Allison for calling my attention to

Zwingli's comments (Sojourners and Strangers, 3 5 1 - 5 2 , n. 140). In view of the criticism made

against the Anabaptists for advocating a baptism contrary to that practiced universally for a

thousand years, it is interesting that Reformed paedobaptists argued for their practice with an

argument unprecedented in church history.

54. In this presentation, I am summarizing the case as given by standard Reformed sources, such as

Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology, 4th and enlarged ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982) and

more recent expositions, such as Randy Booth, Children of the Promise: The Biblical Case for

Infant Baptism; and Strawbridge, ed., The Covenantal Case for Infant Baptism.
MORE THAN SIMPLE SYMBOLS 309

may accordingly be given to infants. As Calvin puts it, "the children of

believers are baptized not in order that they who were previously strang­

ers to the church may then for the first time become children of God, but

rather that, because by the blessing of the promise they already belonged

to the body of Christ, they are received into the church with this solemn
55
sign:' Or as Warfield says more bluntly, "God established his church in

the days of Abraham and put children into it. They must remain there

until He puts them out. He has nowhere put them out. They are still then
56
members of His church and as such entitled to its ordinances:'

As the most important argument of paedobaptists, this covenantal

argument has received considerable attention from the defenders of

57
believer's baptism. While Baptists differ among themselves as to their
58
position on covenant theology as a whole, they are united in seeing the

covenantal argument for infant baptism as lacking persuasive power for a

number of reasons.

First, it greatly overstates continuity to the exclusion of discontinu­

ity. The new covenant is new and different, and one of the key points of

discontinuity is the composition of the covenant community. Jeremiah

3 1 : 3 1 - 3 4 promises that the new covenant community will be composed of

believers only. New Testament teaching overwhelmingly confirms that the

church is to be composed of regenerate persons only, which is the presup­

position for the conviction that baptism is for believers alone. The sign of

circumcision could be applied to infants under the old covenant, for the

covenant community of which it was the sign was a mixed body. But the

church is not to be a mixed body, and thus the sign of that community

should not be given to those not yet members of that community. In the

55. Calvin, Institutes, 2 1 : 1 3 4 3 (4.15.22).

56. B. B. Warfield, Studies in Theology (New York: Oxford University Press, 1932; reprint, Grand

Rapids: Baker, 1 9 8 1 ) , 9:408.

57. See the full book-length response by Jewett, Infant Baptism and the Covenant of Grace; the

lengthy analysis by Stephen Wellum, "Baptism and the Relationships between the Covenants;' in

Believer's Baptism: Sign of the New Covenant in Christ, 9 7 - 1 6 1 ; and the shorter but still significant

responses by Allison, Sojourners and Strangers, 336-51; and Beasley-Murray, Baptism in the New

Testament, 334-44.

58. Jewett (Infant Baptism and the Covenant of Grace, 233) and Fred Malone (The Baptism of

Disciples Alone: A Covenantal Argument for Credo baptism Versus Paedobaptism [ Cape Coral,

FL: Founders Press, 2003], xxxii) argue that covenantal theology, understood rightly, leads to

believer's baptism. Stephen Wellum critiques the covenantal argument for infant baptism as a

progressive covenantalist (see Stephen Wellum and Brent Parker, eds., Progressive Covenantalism

[Nashville: B & H Academic, 2016], and Gregg Allison as a progressive dispensationalist

(Sojourners and Strangers, 88).

310 CHAPTER 1 1

only place where Paul compares baptism and circumcision, he actually

contrasts them ( Col. 2: 1 1 - 1 2 ) . The only way Paul could describe baptism

as a circumcision was as one "not performed by human hands;' but done

"by Christ;' which would seem to be what is called elsewhere "circumci­

sion of the heart" (Rom. 2 : 2 9 ) . Thus the purported parallel of Old Testa­

ment infant circumcision to New Testament baptism breaks down. It

overlooks the discontinuity between the covenants, and in fact, asks us to

59
go backward in redemptive history.

But even more decisively contradicting infant baptism is the very

meaning of baptism. Infant baptism cannot symbolize the purification of

those yet to be purified; it cannot be the visual testimony of one identify­

ing with Christ if infants are not in fact capable of doing so, and it cannot

be their initiation into the church, if they lack the central requirement for

church membership, that of regeneration. But all these fit well with the

practice of believer's baptism.

Baptists believe the case for believer's baptism is strong and sufficient

to justify their limitation of baptism to believers only. In addition to the

positive case for believer's baptism and the weakness of arguments for

infant baptism, there is also the possible dangers infant baptism could

have of confusing children of their need for personal repentance and faith,

and blurring the line between the church and the world. Though they have

no desire to seem arrogant or "disrespectful of the faith of others'?" to

accept the validity of infant baptism seems to them to involve devaluing of

Christ's command to be baptized and accepting a practice that altogether

misses the meaning of baptism.

The Timing ofBaptism

Advocates of believer's baptism commonly face a difficulty in the

timing of baptism, particularly in the baptism of children. The church

should baptize those making a credible profession of faith, with empha-

59. Though no source I have seen discusses it at any length, another obvious point of discontinuity

is that circumcision was only done to male infants, while in the New Testament males and

females are baptized.

60. This is what Leonard Vander Zee sees as the message communicated by Baptist churches who

insist on the rebaptism of those baptized as infants as a requirement to join a Baptist church.

He is glad to hear of British Baptist churches much more accepting of infant baptism. But when

he says that Christians should not let baptism, "of all things, divide them;' I think he unduly

minimizes the importance of baptism (Christ, Baptism and the Lord's Supper, 1 3 3 ) .
MORE THAN SIMPLE SYMBOLS 3 1 1

sis on "credible"?' I would not want to limit when God can act to save
62
a child, and in the case of Christian parents who take seriously their

responsibility to raise their children "in the training and instruction of

the Lord" (Eph. 6:4), children will commonly make professions of faith at

a tender age. But at least until relatively recently, Baptist churches thought

it wise to delay baptism until time revealed the credibility of childhood

63
professions of faith. Reasons are not hard to see. Children of a tender age

are often desirous of pleasing their parents and may not know themselves

whether the motivation to respond to the preaching of the gospel is truly

a response to the work of the Spirit of God or comes from their deep trust

in their parents. It is not at all that such children are lying; they simply may

not yet know their own hearts. We know that in other areas, we do not

take a child's decisions very seriously. The girl who says she wants to be a

doctor or marry the boy next door may be very sincere, but we know that

such decisions are often modified over time.

Moreover, the gospel is a message that involves cognitive informa­

tion and spiritual awareness. When is a child capable of responsibly,

credibly processing all that is involved in the gospel? Of course, the ques­

tion is unanswerable in any definitive sense. There is no magic number

in the Bible, and different children mature at different rates. But William

Hendricks and Dale Moody both assert that children must be lost before

they can be saved, and Hendricks doubts that children younger than nine
64
can experience the radical separation from God that lostness involves.

Others argue that there is some New Testament support for twelve as the

age of accountability, based on Paul's statement in Romans 7:9, which

implies that he was not lost until "the commandment came;' a phrase

quite possibly referring to his bar mitzvah, that occasion when a young

61. See the discussion of this question and the importance of a credible profession of faith in Mark

Dever, "The Church;' in A Theology for the Church, ed. Daniel Akin, rev. ed. (Nashville: B & H

Academic, 2014), 619-20; his fuller discussion in Dever, "Baptism in the Context of the Local

Church;' in Believer's Baptism: Sign of the New Covenant in Christ, 344-50; Allison, Sojourners and

Strangers, 360-62; and Hammett, 40 Questions about Baptism and the Lord's Supper, 165-70.

62. Mark Driscoll mentions one of his sons who was baptized at the age of four (Mark Driscoll and

Gerry Breshears, Death by Love: Letters from the Cross [Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2008], 163);

Wayne Grudem thinks all three of his children had genuine faith in Christ before the age of

seven (Grudem, Systematic Theology, 982, n. 28).

63. Dever gives a lengthy list of Baptist leaders in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries who were

raised in Christian homes but were not baptized until their late teens or twenties ("The Church;'

662-63, n. 1 7 1 ) .

64. Hendricks, A Theology for Children, 249; Dale Moody, The Word of Truth (Grand Rapids:

Eerdmans, 1 9 8 1 ) , 462-63.
312 CHAPTER 1 1

boy became a "son of the commandment" and took on adult responsi­

bilities. David Alan Black sees Paul's statement, along with the account

of Jesus in the temple at the age of twelve (Luke 2 : 4 1 - 5 0 ) , the common

practice of confirmation at the age of twelve among groups which practice

infant baptism, and the findings of secular developmental psychologists of

important cognitive advances around the age of twelve as all pointing to

65
twelve as an age of transition toward adulthood and its responsibilities.

Historically, Baptists were slow to see childhood decisions as credible

professions warranting baptism. Things began to change in the twentieth

century. By 1966, baptisms of those eight years of age and younger amounted

to ten percent of all baptisms in Southern Baptist churches, and baptisms of

those six and younger increased by 250 percent in the years between 1977
66
and 1997. I have both theological and pastoral concerns over these trends.

As indicated above, I am not at all sure that all of these very young

children have reached the age of accountability, or if they have the abil­

ity to experience genuine repentance and faith. If taught well, they may

be able to articulate sound answers to a pastor's or parent's questions, but

have they the spiritual awareness to experience the realities to which those

answers point? Even if God should work supernaturally in their hearts, is

it wise for Baptist churches to certify their faith as credible by baptizing

them? The problems of widespread nominal membership, in which many

baptized church members lead lives indistinguishable from that of non­

believers-and the widespread practice of what are called "rebaptisms''?

in which many formerly baptized in Baptist churches ask to be rebaptized

due to their conviction that they were not truly regenerate when first

baptized-suggest that it is time to reconsider the wisdom of affirming

the credibility of childhood professions through the administration of

believer's baptism to them.

Some recommend nine years as a minimum age for baptism; others

68
twelve, or the teen years. But there are two objections to such policies.

65. Black, The Myth of Adolescence, 59-67.

66. See the data compiled by Tony Hemphill, "The Practice of Infantile Baptism in Southern Baptist

Churches and Subsequent Impact on Regenerate Church Membership;' Faith & Mission 18, no.

3 (Summer 2001), 74-87.

67. The term "rebaptisrn" is actually a misnomer. If faith was not present, biblical baptism did not

occur. What such persons are receiving is not a rebaptism, but their first true baptism. By its

nature, baptism is nonrepeatable. But since the term is widely used, it will be used here.

68. See Hammett, 40 Questions about Baptism and the Lord's Supper, 168-69, for suggestions ranging

from eight to eighteen.

MORE THAN SIMPLE SYMBOLS 313

The first is the assertion that the biblical pattern, especially in the book
69
of Acts, is immediate baptism. The second is that, by its nature, baptism

is an initiatory rite and a command of the Lord. Thus, many see it as a

believer's first act of obedience." Why stand in the way of a believer seek­

ing to obey his Lord?

I think there are two factors that weaken these objections. First,

despite the claims of a strong New Testament pattern of immediate

baptism, the pattern is not nearly as strong as claimed. By my count, there

are six accounts in Acts where baptism does seem to be immediate ( 2 : 4 8 ;

8 : 1 2 ; 8 : 3 6 - 3 8 ; 1 0 : 4 7 - 4 8 ; 1 6 : 3 3 ; 1 9 : 4 - 5 ) ; two additional instances where

the timing is not specified ( 1 6 : 1 4 - 1 5 ; 1 8 : 8 ) , and one instance where it

seems to have been after three days, depending on when one thinks

Paul was converted ( 9 : 9 , 1 8 ) . But there are sixteen places in Acts, where

the gospel is proclaimed and people believe, and there is no mention of

baptism (4:4; 5 : 1 4 ; 6 : 7 ; 8 : 2 5 ; 9 : 3 5 ; 1 1 : 2 0 - 2 1 ; 1 1 : 2 4 ; 1 3 : 1 2 ; 1 3 : 4 8 ; 1 4 : 2 1 ;

14:25; 16:5; 17:4; 17:12; 1 7 : 3 4 ; and 2 8 : 2 4 ) . Admittedly, this is an argu­

ment from silence, but I think the silence is significant. If immediate

baptism is important, why is it not consistently reflected? And, in view

of Paul's statement in 1 Corinthians 1 : 1 4 - 1 7 , it seems quite likely that

there were a number of instances in which Paul preached the gospel,

people responded in faith, but these new converts were not immedi­

ately baptized. Second, there is no command to be baptized immediately;

therefore, it is not disobedience to delay baptism, especially when the

reason is to take care that the one baptized is a believer, whose profes­

sion has been seen to be credible.

While these precautions would be most important and needed in the

case of childhood professions, even the baptism of adult converts could be

enhanced by a shorter time of preparation and teaching to insure that they

understand the significance of their baptism and such that the congrega­

tion has had time to see something of their lives and thus be able to affirm

69. Robert Saucy says, "It is significant that every baptism in Acts took place almost immediately

following the confession of faith" (Church in God's Program, 195). Robert Stein affirms that

baptism is one of five facets of the conversion experience in Acts, all of which happened "at

the same time, usually on the same day," the others being repentance, faith, confession, and

receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit (Stein, "Baptism in Luke-Acts:' in Believer's Baptism: Sign of

the New Covenant in Christ, 52).

70. This is a phrase I have heard used to refer to baptism among Baptists. It is taken by Larry Dyer

as the title of his short book on baptism, Baptism: The Believer's First Obedience ( Grand Rapids;

Kregel, 2000).
314 CHAPTER 1 1

their profession of faith as credible. This could be handled through a new

members' class that would be mandatory for all new members, but would

71
be especially important for those coming as new converts. Finally, the

actual baptismal service should be as memorable, serious, and joyous as a

wedding service, for it is the time when one who has come to love the Lord

takes vows in a time of public commitment."

The Mode ofBaptism

By mode, we mean the manner in which baptism is administered. Is

it by pouring or sprinkling water on the head, or by total immersion in

water? Immersion was common in the early church, as is witnessed by

large baptisteries still visible at many sites. But in addition to the prac­
73
tice of the New Testament church and early church, J. L. Garrett argues

that "the continuance of the practice of immersion until the late medi­

eval era in the West and in Eastern Orthodoxy up to the present suggests

that immersion has had a long history of observance;' with Thomas Aqui­

74
nas referring to immersion as "more common" even in his day. Over

the years, immersion was gradually replaced by pouring and sprinkling.

Calvin acknowledged that the biblical word baptize means to immerse,

but thought the mode of baptism was "of no importance, but ought to be

optional to churches according to the diversity of countries.?" John Smyth

and the General Baptists practiced baptism by pouring for the first three

decades of Baptist life, until Particular Baptists in 1639 moved to restore

71. Such classes are in some ways a revival of the early church's practice of the catechumenate, with

at least one difference being the much greater length of the catechumenate, sometimes up to

three years between profession and baptism. See Clinton Arnold, "Early Church Catechesis and

New Christians' Classes in Contemporary Evangelicalism;' Journal of the Evangelical Theological

Society 47, no. 1. For more on new members classes, see the suggestions in chapter 5 of this book

and Dever, "Baptism in the Context of the Local Church:' 334.

72. See suggestions for baptismal services in Cross, Baptism and the Baptists, 395-405; Dever,

"Baptism in the Context of the Local Church;' 338; and Charles Deweese, A Community of

Believers; Making Church Membership More Meaningful (Valley Forge, PA: Judson Press, 1978),

appendix C, 1 1 4 - 1 1 6 .

73. I. H. Marshall acknowledges that immersion was the general practice in New Testament times,

and Calvin says immersion was observed "in the ancient church:' See Marshall, "The Meaning of

the Verb 'Baptize:" in Dimensions of Baptism: Biblical and Theological Studies, eds. Stanley Porter

and Anthony Cross, JSNTSup 234 (London and New York: Sheffield Academic Press, 2002), 23;

and Calvin, Institutes, 2 1 : 1 3 2 0 ( 4 . 1 5 . 1 9 ) .

74. James Leo Garrett, Jr., Systematic Theology: Biblical, Historical, Evangelical, 2 vols. (Grand

Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995), 2:579-80; Thomas Aquinas, "Baptism and Confirmation:' in Summa

Theologiae, 5 7 : 3 1 .

75. Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 2 1 : 1 3 2 0 ( 4 . 1 5 . 1 9 ) .

MORE THAN SIMPLE SYMBOLS 315

76
immersion as the proper mode. Immersion was endorsed by the 1644

London Confession and all major Baptist confessions thereafter. It soon

became the standard mode for baptism among virtually all Baptists.

77
The reasons for supporting immersion are basically three. One is

that, as widely recognized today, immersion is the meaning of the Greek

word baptize." Second is that immersion fits the New Testament descrip­

tions of baptism, where individuals are described as «coming up out of

79
the water" (Mark 1 : 1 0 ) . Third is that immersion best communicates the

meaning of baptism, especially as described in Romans 6:3-4 and Colos­

sians 2 : 1 2 . Our union with Christ is described as being "buried with him

through baptism" (Rom. 6:4) or «buried with him in baptism" (Col. 2 : 1 2 ) .

Despite the objections of some, Thomas Schreiner argues that this symbol­

ism relating to our union with Christ is better pictured by immersion than

other modes: «Death and burial are portrayed when the new believer is

submerged under the water. The emersion from the water points to the

new life that believers enjoy even now by virtue of Christ's resurrection . . .

. Pouring and sprinkling simply do not have the same effect?"

Nineteenth-century Baptists insisted on immersion as the only

81
acceptable mode for baptism and offered detailed defenses of it. Today,

while Baptists continue to defend immersion as the mode that best suits

the meaning of the word baptize and the meaning of baptism as identifi-

76. Dale Moody, "Baptism in Theology and Practice;' in Basden and Dockery, eds., The People of

God, 48, says it was Romans 6:3-4 that convinced the Particular Baptists to adopt immersion as

the proper mode of baptism.

77. A fourth argument is really more a counter to a common argument made for allowing a variety

of modes, an argument from history that various modes have been practiced and none have

been pronounced as essential. Some would want to challenge or at least qualify that argument

with evidence that immersion has had a long history of observance (see Hammett, 40 Questions

about Baptism and the Lord's Supper, 157-58), but this historical argument does not typically

play a large place in the writings of advocates of immersion.

78. Though he argues that it is not the only possible meaning, I. H. Marshall acknowledges that

immerse is "the normal meaning of baptize" ("The Meaning of the Verb 'Baptize;" 17).

79. Gregg Allison notes that the description of the baptism of the eunuch in Acts 8:38 supports

immersion. The eunuch got down out of his chariot to be baptized: "Surely, sufficient water for

a different mode of baptism was available on board the chariot or with the eunuch's entourage"

(Sojourners and Strangers, 353).

80. Thomas Schreiner, "Baptism in the Epistles: An Initiation Rite for Believers:' in Believer's

Baptism: Sign of the New Covenant in Christ, 8 1 - 8 2 . The ethical implications of union with

Christ for the meaning of baptism are brought out well by Daniel L. Akin, "The Meaning of

Baptism:' in Restoring Integrity in Baptist Churches, eds. Thomas White, Jason Duesing, and

Malcolm Yarnell III (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2008), 67-79.

81. Perhaps the best representative is Dagg, Manual of Theology, 21-68, where Dagg gives a forty­

eight-page defense of immersion.

316 CHAPTER 1 1

cation with Christ (in his death, burial, and resurrection), it is not a topic

of intense debate. In certain exceptional circumstances pouring or sprin -

82
kling may be acceptable, but immersion is biblically, theologically, and

symbolically preferable.

The Importance of Baptism in Contemporary Church Life

Baptism is one aspect of church life that many think about along these

lines: «Is it really important? Does it really matter? After all, no evangelical

claims that it is absolutely necessary for salvation. It's just a symbol:' Admit­

tedly, baptism is not a «first-order doctrine" involving an essential Christian

belief, but a denominational doctrine, one that has separated denominations

over the years. Today we live in a postdenominational era, when denomi­

national distinctives are regarded as unfortunate, irrelevant, and hardly

83
worth fussing over. Ifs reflected in the lack of care we give to baptism.

For example, sermons on the importance of obeying Christ's command

to be baptized are rare to nonexistent. Our baptismal services rarely show

thoughtfulness or serve as occasions for articulate confession and joyful

commitment to Christ and his church. Furthermore, some Baptists seem to

doubt the value or validity of maintaining believer's baptism. Todd Wilson,

while seeing believer's baptism as the ideal, maintains that Baptists «corrupt

the symbol" when they require Christians baptized as infants to be rebap­

tized for membership in a Baptist church, because «baptizing a believer who

has already been walking with God is a contradiction of the New Testament

meaning of baptism?" But if believer's baptism is a matter of obedience,

Wilson seems to prefer no obedience to the incomplete, imperfect delayed

obedience of a later baptism. Baptist pastors and church members need

to take baptism more seriously as an act of obedience, commitment, and

worship. There are a number of way ways in which they can do so.

In terms of obedience, we simply need to note that baptism is in fact

commanded. Many Christians eagerly talk of fulfilling the Great Commis­

sion, given by Christ in Matthew 2 8 : 1 9 - 2 0 , but rarely note that baptiz­

85
ing is one of the activities that is to characterize the making of disciples.

82. For example, I once had a student whose church voted to allow him to baptize a man who was

terminally ill by sprinkling. I would make similar exceptions for someone who was pathologically

afraid of water or individuals so ill that immersion would be dangerous to their health.

83. See the discussion in Hammett, 40 Questions about Baptism and the Lord's Supper, 173-79,

under the heading, "Should Baptismal Beliefs Be a Cause of Division?"

84. Wilson, "Why Baptists Should Not Rebaptize Christians from Other Denominations:' 5:45, 43.

85. See the discussion in D. A. Carson, "Matthew:' in The Expositor's Bible Commentary, 8:597.
MORE THAN SIMPLE SYMBOLS 317

We must obey Christ in baptizing to fulfill the Great Commission. The

sermon that marked the birth of the church concluded with the command,

"Repent and be baptized" (Acts 2 : 3 8 ) , a command the church obeyed as

the gospel went forth. Ephesians 4 : 5 assumes that all Christians share in

the "one baptism'?" The New Testament has no conception of an unbap­

tized Christian. It is assumed to be a natural act of obedience, showing

one's allegiance to Christ. It should also be an act of obedience required

by the church, as the ordained way that a new member is incorporated

into the local body. What Christ ordained and commanded should not

be despised by his followers today. The fact that we cannot agree on how

baptism should be understood does not negate Christ's command.

Perhaps we would take baptism more seriously as an act of obedi­

ence if it was being done as a genuine symbol of commitment. Seeing

young children nod assent to a pastor's question may be very precious

or cute to parents, but it is not an adequate symbol of commitment.

Churches must make a good faith effort to ensure they baptize only

those who can make a credible profession of faith. Such baptismal

candidates should be able to bear witness to the congregation that they

are requesting baptism in order to testify obediently to their commit­

ment to Christ. Then, while standing in the baptismal pool, candidates

should be asked to make a profession of faith, not just answering a

simple question, but stating their commitment.

If practiced in such a way, baptism could be a powerful means of

worship. The very act pictures the transforming power of the gospel to

put to death an old life and grant a new life, and may communicate the

message in a more vivid way than words alone. For the one being baptized,

it should be as memorable a day as a wedding, the day of public commit­

ment to a life oflove and union with the Lord. For the baptizing commu­

nity, it should be an occasion as joyous as the birth of a new child into a

family, with solemn dedication to the task of caring for this new member

Carson says that baptizing should not be seen as the means of making disciples but as having a

modal and imperatival force as one of the activities that characterize disciple-making.

86. Some may wonder if the "one baptism" is water baptism or Spirit baptism. In the context of

Ephesians 4, water baptism seems most likely in view, as it is "a comprehensive, practical, public,

binding, joyful confession of that 'one faith' in the 'one Lord:" See Markus Barth, "Ephesians:' in

The Anchor Bible, eds. W. F. Albright and D. N. Freedman (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1974),

34A:469-70. However, it is also possible to see Spirit baptism and water baptism as two forms

or aspects of the one baptism: The former marks one's entrance into the invisible church ( 1 Cor.

1 2 : 1 3 ) ; the latter marks one's incorporation into a local church (Acts 2 : 4 1 ) .

318 CHAPTER 1 1

of the family. It should also be a time of renewal of the vows of allegiance

and commitment taken by each member of the church at the time of her

or his baptism. For all, it should be a high and joyous time of worship.

THE LORD'S SUPPER:

THE ORDINANCE OF RENEWAL

Baptism is a one-time initiatory rite, symbolizing and sealing our

commitment to Christ and his church. The Lord's Supper is a continu­

ing rite that churches observe repeatedly. In many denominations it is the

central act of worship. While it is a multifaceted event, it may best be seen

as a time of renewal. To carry further the analogy developed earlier in this

chapter, if baptism is the wedding ceremony in which a believer publicly

declares his or her commitment to Christ, the Lord's Supper is similar to

an anniversary celebration in which the wedding vows are renewed. In fact,

some Baptist churches in earlier times would recite their church covenant

prior to observing the Lord's Supper, verbally renewing their commitment

to the Lord and one another. Significantly, it is the only act of worship for

which we are given specific instructions in the New Testament, and an act

that almost all Christians have observed down through history. When we

partake of the bread and drink of the cup, we join a band of untold millions.

It is an act that deserves more attention than Baptists usually give it.

An Act with Many Names

There are a variety of terms used for this ordinance, most with some
87
biblical support. It is called communion in 1 Corinthians 1 0 : 16 and the

Lord's Table in 1 Corinthians 1 0 : 2 1 . The phrase "the breaking of bread" in

Acts 2:42 and 20:7 probably refers to this rite as well. The term Eucharist

is preferred by many, especially those in liturgical traditions. It is derived

from the Greek word for thanksgiving, eucharistia, which is associated

with this rite in 1 Corinthians 1 1 :24 and in each of the Synoptic Gospel

accounts (Matt. 26:26-27; Mark 1 4 : 2 2 - 2 3 ; Luke 2 2 : 1 7 - 1 9 ) . Perhaps the

most common term among Baptists is the Lord's Supper ( 1 Cor. 11:20),

reminding us that originally this rite involved an actual meal.

One term not derived from Scripture is the older Catholic term, the

Mass. It came from the Latin term missa, which meant dismissal, and was

87. This is the translation in the King James Version of koinonia in this verse; most modern versions

translate it as "participation" or "sharing:'

MORE THAN SIMPLE SYMBOLS 319

originally used as the closing blessing of any time of worship. Eventually it

88
was applied only to the Lord's Supper. It was the traditional term among

Catholics for centuries, but many Catholics since Vatican II have been
89
returning to the biblical term Eucharist.

The Debate over ((This Is My Body"

The Gospels record Christ instituting what we call the Lord's Supper

during an observance of Passover with his disciples (Matt. 26: 17-30; Mark

1 4 : 1 2 - 2 6 ; Luke 22:7-30). As such, it was a celebration of God's redemp­

tion of Israel from slavery in Egypt. Part of that redemption involved the

plague of the death of the firstborn of all the households of Egypt. Only

those protected by the blood of a lamb were spared. The Lord's Supper was

to signify the death of Christ, called by Paul "our Passover lamb" ( 1 Cor. 5 : 7 ) .

Interestingly, there is no record of the disciples celebrating Passover after

the death of Christ. Passover celebrated the establishment of God's covenant

with Israel. But in this observance with his disciples, Jesus described the cup
90
as "the new covenant;' established by his blood (Luke 22:20).

Historically, the greatest controversy over the Lord's Supper has been

over the words spoken by Jesus, called "the words of institution:' Those

words are "This is my body" There are four major interpretations of these
91
words. The traditional Catholic view is called transubstantiation. This

view developed gradually and was not officially adopted until 1 2 1 5 , at

the Fourth Lateran Council. Prior to then, there had been some who had

made a careful distinction between the elements (the sign) and Christ's

body and blood (the thing signified). There were some who used language

that could imply the doctrine of real presence, but it could also have been

simply figurative language. The issue was first debated explicitly in the

88. McBrien, Catholicism, 823.

89. While acknowledging that a variety of names may be used for it, the most recent edition of the

Catholic Catechism primarily uses Eucharist ( Catechism of the Catholic Church [Rome, Italy and

New Hope, KY: Urbi et Orbi, 1994], 334). For more on this question, see Hammett, 40 Questions

about Baptism and the Lord's Supper, 183-87.

90. There are many intriguing aspects of the traditional Passover celebration that foreshadow

Christian truths. These are explained in a presentation popularized by a number of messianic

Jewish organizations called "Christ in the Passover" and published in book form by Moishe

Rosen, Christ in the Passover: Why Is This Night Different? (Chicago: Moody, 1978).

91. For all four views, see John Armstrong, ed., Understanding Four Views on the Lord's Supper

(Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2007). For the four major views plus a Pentecostal view, see Gordon

Smith, ed., The Lord's Supper: Five Views (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2008). Both offer

presentations of the various views by advocates of them in a point-counterpoint fashion, in

which the contributors gives their own view and a critique of the other views.
320 CHAPTER 1 1

92
ninth century between two otherwise obscure monks. Radbertus (785-

860), "hankering for the mysterious and supernatural that characterized

his time, taught that a miracle takes place at the words of institution in

the supper: the elements are changed into the actual body and blood of

Christ?" He was opposed by another monk, named Ratramnus (d. 868),

who taught "the Augustinian position that Christ's presence in the supper

is spiritual?" Official Catholic teaching came to follow Radbertus and

affirm that when a properly ordained priest lifts the host (from the Latin

word hostia, or "sacrificial victim;' the term used to refer to the physical

elements of bread and wine) and pronounces the words of institution (Hoc

est corpus meum) a miracle occurs. The outward appearance, or accidents,

of the bread and wine remain the same, but the inner reality, or substance,

is changed (transubstantiated) into the actual physical body and blood of

Christ. His body and blood are really, physically present in every wafer,
95
every drop of wine. Thus the celebration of the Mass involves a recruci­

fixion of Christ (an unbloody sacrifice), and grants to those who partake

forgiveness of venial sins, an increase of grace, strength for preservation

96
from mortal sin, and hope of ultimate salvation.

All the Reformers objected to the idea that the priest had some power

to deliver a miracle, to the idea of a recrucifixion of Christ, and to the

idea that partaking provides grace and forgiveness of sins. But Luther

did not object to the idea of Christ's physical presence. His view is called

consubstantiation. It affirms that Christ's physical body is present in the

Supper, not because of the words of a priest, but because Christ prom­

ised to be there. For Luther, the words, "This is my body;' settle the ques-

92. For more on this debate, see David Hogg, "Carolingian Conflict: Two Monks on the Mass;' in

The Lord's Supper: Remembering and Proclaiming Christ until He Comes, ed. Thomas Schreiner

and Matthew Crawford, NAC Studies in Bible & Theology (Nashville: B & H Academic, 2 0 1 0 ) ,

127-50.

93. M. E. Osterhaven, "Lord's Supper, Views of;' in Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, 705.

94. Ibid.

95. Some contend that the common phrase used by magicians, hocus pocus, is a corruption of the

words used in the Latin mass, Hoc est corpus meum, as transubstantiation may have seemed to be

something like magic to the common people. Perhaps it was first suggested in a sermon by John

Tillotson, the Archbishop of Canterbury, written sometime before 1694: "In all probability those

common juggling words of hocus pocus are nothing else but a corruption of hoc est corpus, by way

of ridiculous imitation of the priests of the Church of Rome in their trick of Transubstantiation:'

But Tillotson provides no evidence for his charge, and it is doubtful that he is providing an

accurate etymology here. See http://www.wordorigins.org/index.php/site/comments/hocus_

pocus, accessed 7I 1 1 / 2 0 1 7 . The site gives Oxford English Dictionary, 2nd edition, as its source.

96. For more detail, see the discussion in McBrien, Catholicism, 820-33.
MORE THAN SIMPLE SYMBOLS 321

tion. He would not join forces with fellow Reformer Huldrych Zwingli

because Zwingli argued that the word is means'signifies," Despite the fact

that Zwingli could show several places in Scripture where is clearly means

"signifies" Luther refused to consider Zwingli's view and regarded it as

un-Christian. He said, "I have pressed them to show conclusive grounds

why these words 'This is my body; just as they are read, are false'"" For

Luther, the words had to be literal if they were true.

It is hard to understand why Luther was so adamant on this point,

since he recognized figurative language elsewhere in Scripture. There are

some hints of mysticism in his thinking, and he grew up among German

peasants, whose religion often contained virtual superstition. Others

think this was one aspect of his Catholic background he could not surren­

der, but in view of his attacks on the Catholic doctrine of the Mass, that

seems unlikely. Whatever his reasons, he prized the presence of Christ in

the Lord's Supper, and would not surrender the real and physical nature

of that presence.

By contrast, Zwingli's name is associated with what is called the

memorial view. Zwingli did not deny that Christ was spiritually present

with believers when they gather in his name, but in his debate with Luther

he emphasized that the word is in "This is my body" means "signifies;'

and was so concerned to deny physical presence that he said little about
98
the idea of spiritual presence. The Lord's Supper is primarily done "in

remembrance;' as a memorial of what Christ did.

99
Calvin presents something of a mediating position. With Luther,

he affirms Christ's presence in the Lord's Supper, but with Zwingli he

denies that it can be a physical presence, since Christ's body ascended into

heaven. He speaks of the Lord's Supper as a mystery whose purpose is "to

nourish, refresh, strengthen, and gladden:' In it, we receive Christ, but we

do so by faith and by means of signs, which should neither be disdained

97. Martin Luther, "Confession Concerning Christ's Supper:' in Luther, Basic Theological Writings, 376.

98. Bruce Ware points to a growing consensus among scholars that Zwingli held to a spiritual

presence view alongside his memorial interpretation. See Ware, "The Meaning of the Lord's

Supper in the Theology of Ulrich Zwingli [ 1 4 8 4 - 1 5 3 1 ] ;• in The Lord's Supper: Remembering and

Proclaiming Christ until He Comes, 240-43.

99. Calvin's view is complex. Though he and the Reformed position as a whole is usually seen as

the spiritual presence view, Keith Mathison has argued that Calvin's view was actually closer to

real presence, and that the majority view in most Reformed churches today is actually the view

of Zwingli. See Keith Mathison, Given for You: Reclaiming Calvin's Doctrine of the Lord's Supper

(Phillipsburg, NJ: P & R, 2002), xv-xvi.

322 CHAPTER 1 1

nor «immoderately" extolled.l'" Calvin also helpfully brings in the work

of the Spirit in the Lord's Supper. Christ's flesh is not dragged down out

of heaven into the bread; rather, we are lifted to him, through «the secret

working of the Spirit:' He confesses, «if anyone should ask me how this

takes place, I shall not be ashamed to confess that it is a secret too lofty

for either my mind to comprehend or my words to declare. And, to speak

101
more plainly, I rather experience than understand it:'

This view of the spiritual presence of Christ in the Lord's Supper has

been the most widely held position among Protestants and especially

among Reformed groups since the Reformation, and has been affirmed

by Baptists in at least one important confession. While Baptists are most

commonly associated with the Zwinglian, memorial view, the Second

London Confession of Baptists incorporates the following paragraph,

taken almost verbatim from the Westminster Confession:

Worthy receivers, outwardly partaking of the visible Elements in this Ordi­

nance, do then also inwardly by faith, really and indeed, yet not carnally,

and corporally, but spiritually receive, and feed upon Christ crucified and

all the benefits of his death: the Body and Blood of Christ, being then not

corporally or carnally but spiritually, present to the faith of Believers, in that

ordinance, as the Elements themselves are to their outward senses.

However, this view is somewhat unusual in Baptist life. The view found

most often with reference to the Lord's Supper is memorial.

The Meaning of the Lord's Supper

In a sense, the debate over the nature of Christ's presence in the Lord's

Supper is unfortunate, for at least two reasons. Some, especially some

Baptists, have been so concerned to deny the physical presence of Christ

in the Lord's Supper that they are guilty of teaching a doctrine of the real

absence of Christ, ignoring Christ's promise to always be with his people

when they gather in his name (Matt. 1 8 : 2 0 ) . Why would that be some­

how less true when we gather to obey his commands in an observance of

the Lord's Supper? We may have good reason to deny the physical pres-

100. Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 2 1 : 1 3 6 3 - 6 5 ( 4 . 1 7 . 3 , 5).

101. Ibid., 2 1 : 1 4 0 3 ( 4 . 1 7 . 3 1 , 3 2 )
MORE THAN SIMPLE SYMBOLS 323

ence, but we should always expect to experience the Lord's presence, by his

102
Spirit, when we gather in his name.

A second reason why the focus on the question of the presence of

Christ is unfortunate is that many miss the more important question of the

meaning of the Lord's Supper, which goes far beyond the issue of real pres­

ence. Indeed, a good grasp of the meaning of the Lord's Supper is crucial

for guidance in addressing other related questions, such as who may prop­

erly partake of the Supper (the question of open versus closed commu­

nion), and whether the Supper may be observed outside the bounds of a

gathered church (for example, at a wedding).

I want to suggest there are five aspects to the meaning of the Lord's

Supper. I think all five are found or implied in the most complete teach­

ing we are given on the Lord's Supper, 1 Corinthians 1 1 : 17-34, with some

additional help given in 1 Corinthians 10: 1 6 - 1 7 . I think they can be

conveniently describes as five «looks:'

First, the Lord's Supper calls us to look back in remembrance. This is

the most obvious aspect, as Jesus explicitly commands us to eat and drink

«in remembrance of me" ( 1 Cor. 1 1 : 2 4 - 2 5 ) . The word anamnesis, remem­

brance, is far richer than a merely mental recollection of certain facts. This

is remembrance that leads to renewal of faith, hope, love, and assurance. We

are given physical signs to see, taste, smell, touch, and even taste, to recall

the reality of Christ in a vivid and fresh way. We are to remember his body

and blood given «for you" ( 1 Cor. 1 1 : 2 4 ) . The elements recall most clearly

for us Christ's death, but the call is to remember him, not just his death. The

Lord's Supper should also be an occasion for pondering the wonder of the

incarnation, the amazing life Jesus led, and the victory of resurrection. That

leads us to the second aspect of the meaning of the Lord's Supper.

Second, we look ahead in anticipation. The Lord's Supper has an expira­

tion date. We only do it «until he comes" ( 1 Cor. 1 1 : 2 6 ) . The Lord's Supper

is in some sense a rehearsal for another meal to come, the wedding banquet

of the Lamb (Rev. 1 9 : 6 - 9 ) . Thus, celebrations of the Lord's Supper should be

marked by hope and joy. Russell Moore calls for a recovery of the sense of joy

102. Curtis Freeman traces some of the factors in what he calls "this curious doctrine of 'real

absence'" in Baptist life. He does note that it was more common among the common people

than Baptist theologians, was never universal, and was even a minority opinion in some eras.

See Curtis Freeman, "To Feed Upon by Faith': Nourishment from the Lord's Table:' in Baptist

Sacramentalism, eds. Anthony Cross and Philip Thompson, Studies in Baptist History and

Thought, vol. 5 (Carlisle, UK and Waynesboro, GA: Paternoster, 2003), 203, n. 25.
324 CHAPTER 1 1

and triumph that should come from this anticipation. He urges that congre­

gations be taught to view the Lord's Supper as "a victory lap-announcing

the triumph of Christ over the powers of sin, death and Satan."?' even if our

celebration is in anticipation. One often unnoticed implication of this aspect

of the meaning of the Lord's Supper is its application to the question of the

real presence of Christ in the Lord's Supper. If Christ is actually, physically

present, would that not mean the expiration date for the Lord's Supper had

arrived? We only do it until he comes. Ifhe is physically present, would it not

mean that he had come? Perhaps the advocates of real presence could find

some way to affirm physical presence apart from his coming, but the fact

that the Lord's Supper calls us to anticipation includes with it the recogni­

tion that in some sense, he has not come yet.

A third aspect calls on us to look within in self-examination. The

command to do so is given in 1 Corinthians 1 1 :28, and failing to do so

can lead to "sinning against the body and blood of the Lord" (v. 27), and

not "discerning the body of Christ" (v. 29) can bring possibly deadly

consequences (v. 30). Gordon Fee and Gregg Allison are among those

104
who think this call to self-examination has been widely misunderstood.

They fear that some may judge themselves as unworthy participants and

refrain. But the reality is that all we will ever have to present to God will

be unworthiness. The problem is not unworthy participants, but unwor­

thy participation. What type of participation is worthy? Certainly one in

which we bring a recognition of our unworthiness, but also one in which

we come in faith and love. I have found very helpful the guide to self­

examination in the Anglican Book of Common Prayer. It counsels self­

examination in three areas: repentance, faith and Iove.!" All three seem

fitting and in keeping with the meaning of the Lord's Supper. We come as

needy sinners, but not arrogant sinners. We cannot partake worthily if we

come to receive the tokens of what Christ did to provide forgiveness, while

intending to live contrary to all Christ stands for. So we come, renewing

103. Russell Moore, "Baptist View;' in Understanding Four Views on the Lord's Supper, 33.

104. Gordon Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, New International Commentary on the New

Testament, ed. F. F. Bruce (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987), 560-61; Allison, Sojourners and

Strangers, 406-07.

105. The 1549 version of the service for communion includes these words: "repent you truly for your

sins past; have an earnest and lively faith in Christ our Saviour; be in perfect charity with all men;

so shall ye be meet partakers of those holy Mysteries:' See Book of Common Prayer (London:

Everyman's Library, 1999), 575. The pagination is from the 1662 version, but it includes the 1549

version of the service for communion.

MORE THAN SIMPLE SYMBOLS 325

our repentance. We also come renewing our faith. Calvin says "the worthi­

ness, which is commanded by God, consists chiefly in faith,"!" This too

seems consonant with the meaning of the Lord's Supper. Our looking back

and looking ahead are both acts of faith; faith is the proper way to receive

all of God's gifts (Eph. 2 : 8 - 9 ) ; and without faith it is impossible to please

God (Heb. 1 1 : 6 ) . I would specify that the love we come to renew in our

self-examination is love for all the members of the body. But this leads us

to a separate and fourth aspect of meaning.

We are to look around in fellowship. I think this horizontal aspect is

the most neglected aspect of meaning, and yet one that is obvious both in

the text and in the very manner in which we partake of the Lord's Supper.

No one takes the Lord's Supper at home, alone, and yet we rarely ponder

the significance of partaking with others. There are three clues in the text

of Scripture, alerting us to the importance of this aspect. The first is in 1

Corinthians 1 0 : 1 6 - 1 7 , where the Lord's Supper seems to be a way for a local

church to proclaim its oneness, or its unity. That was the problem in the

way the Corinthian church was observing the Lord's Supper, and the occa­

sion for Paul's teaching in 1 Corinthians 1 1 : 1 7 - 3 4 . They were observing it

individualistically (v. 2 1 ) . Second, there is the fivefold use of the verb syner­

chomai, "come together:' in this passage ( 1 Cor. 1 1 : 1 7 , 1 8 , 20, 33, 34). The

clear implication is that they were coming together expressly to celebrate

the Lord's Supper, as something intrinsically corporate. The third clue is in

verse 29. They are warned of the danger of partaking "without discerning

the body of Christ:' It does not say "the body and blood;' as elsewhere in the

passage (v. 27). The body they were called upon to discern in this verse is not

the broken body and shed blood of Christ, but the gathered body of Christ

107
in the church of the Corinthians. The call to self-examination in terms

of renewing love for the body of believers is necessary to partake rightly,

because in our participation we say, "We are one body; we are brothers and

sisters:' with all the rich meaning those words had in that culture. Even one

of the terms we use for this observance, communion, speaks to this real­

ity. We experience communion, or fellowship, with God; but also with the

members of the body. As we partake, we ought to literally look around, to

discern the body of Christ God has providentially placed us in, and renew

our love for our brothers and sisters and experience fellowship with them.

106. Calvin, Institutes, 2 1 : 1 4 2 0 (4.17.42).

107. Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 563-64.

326 CHAPTER 1 1

The fifth and final aspect of meaning is one that is not explicitly in the

text of 1 Corinthians 1 1 : 1 7 - 3 4 , but I think is implicit in the whole of New

Testament teaching. When we partake of the Lord's Supper in the manner

outlined above, seeking to act in believing obedience, I think we may look

up in expectation. God may, and I think will, show up to bless his people

as they act in faith and obedience. While we may believe we have good

reason to deny the physical presence of Christ, we should not forget the

promise of Christ to be with his people when they gather in his name. But

should we expect some special sense of his presence when we gather in his

name around the Lord's Supper? Here is where I think Baptists may need

to recover something of a sacramental understanding of the Lords Supper.

Not for a moment should we believe that the Lord's Supper is necessary

for salvation, or that partaking automatically transfers grace. But seeing

God as totally inactive in the Lord's Supper, and seeing it as involving only

our actions, is not necessary or in keeping with larger biblical teaching.

Does not God always bless believing obedience? Why did God ordain this

observance, if not for our blessing?

Thus a growing number of Baptists are open to referring to the Lord's

Supper as a means of grace, defined as "any activity within the fellowship

of the church that God uses to give more grace to Christians,"!" Others

are even more emphatic, describing both baptism and the Lord's Supper

as "means of grace in so far as they are events where we experience God's

presence and Christian fellowship in a way that we do nowhere else,"!" I

am not sure that we can or need to specify how God will bless the believ­

ing obedience of his people in the Lord's Supper. The fact that the Lords

Supper consists of a common food and drink has led most traditions to

see the Lord's Supper as one of the avenues by which God spiritually nour­

110
ishes his people. The ideas of unity and right discernment of the body

in 1 Corinthians 1 0 : 1 7 and 1 1 :29 suggest that God might be active corpo-

108. This is the definition of Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology, 950. He specifically includes the

Lord's Supper as one of these means of grace. Russell Moore also uses the language of means of

grace in reference to the Lord's Supper ("Baptist View;' in Understanding Four Views on the Lord's

Supper, 35).

109. Michael Bird, "Re-Thinking a Sacramental View of Baptism and the Lord's Supper for the Post­

Christendom Baptist Church;' in Baptist Sacramentalism 2, eds. Anthony Cross and Philip

Thompson, Studies in Baptist History and Thought, vol. 25 (Milton Keynes, UK/Colorado

Springs/Hyderabad, India: Paternoster, 2008), 76.

110. This is evident in the paragraph the Second London Confession and Philadelphia Confession

take verbatim from the Westminster Confession, cited earlier, describing how believers

spiritually feed upon Christ in the Lord's Supper.

MORE THAN SIMPLE SYMBOLS 327

rately in a body, strengthening their unity and deepening their commu­

nion. But there might be other ways God would want to bless believing

obedience. But unless we are looking up with expectant hearts, we may

miss what God wishes to do among us.

Who May Partake? Open versus Closed Communion

One issue of special importance to Baptists has been the question of

who may properly partake of the Lord's Supper. With a very few excep­

tions, both sides in this controversy believe the Lord's Supper should be

limited to believers. i n They differ in what additional limitations there

should be. The view called open communion affirms that the Lord's

Supper should be open to all believers. The opposing view, called variously

strict communion, close communion, closed communion, or restricted

communion, believes that there is an additional limitation. Communion

112
should be limited to baptized believers. There is a third position that is

really a subcategory of closed communion. It limits participation in the

Lord's Supper to the members in good standing of that one local church

where the Supper is being observed. Some call this "closed communion;'

and call the previous position "close communion:' Others call it locked

communion, but the most descriptive term seems to be local-church-only.

This discussion will use the term "closed communion'' for the position that

the Lord's Supper is closed to Christians who have not received baptism

(as Baptists understand baptism), as it is the most common term histori­

cally, and local-church-only for that position which limits participation to

113
members in good standing of one local church.

111. There are a few in church history, most notably Solomon Stoddard and John Wesley, who have

argued for the Lord's Supper as "a converting ordinance" and offered it to nonbelievers, and a

few contemporary churches who offer the Lord's Supper to all and leave it up to each individual's

conscience. In a 2012 survey, that was the position of 5 percent of Southern Baptist churches. See

Hammett, 40 Questions about Baptism and the Lord's Supper, 259-60; and Carol Pipes, "Life Way

Surveys Lord's Supper Practices of SBC Churches;' l, http://www.lifeway.com/Article/research­

survey-lords-supper-practices-sbcchurches, accessed 6/15/2017.

112. Strong, Systematic Theology, 9 7 1 - 7 3 , adds two further prerequisites: church membership and

"an orderly walk:' However, since baptism is linked to church membership and most advocates

of open communion would support the requirement of an orderly walk, requiring baptism prior

to communion remains the key difference.

113. For examples of the variety of terms used, see Allison (Sojourners and Strangers, 400-06), who

uses the terms close and closed; and Emir Caner ("Fencing the Table;' in Restoring Integrity in

Baptist Churches, 174), who uses the terms of cracked, closed, and locked. Historian Greg Wills

says Baptists prior to 1900 used close, strict, or restricted for their practice, and since 1900 closed

has become common usage. In each case, the meaning was that communion was limited to
328 CHAPTER 1 1

Most denominations have seen a biblical-theological logic in requiring

114
baptism prior to participation in the Lord's Supper. Gregg Allison says

restricting participation to baptized believers is "the historical position of the

church"!" The problem is that Baptists do not see infant baptism as baptism

at all. J. L. Dagg says the advocates of open and closed communion agree on

the underlying principle, but not on how to apply it: "With them [ advocates

of open communion] we have no controversy as to the principle by which

approach to the Lord's table should be regulated. We differ from them in

practice, because we account nothing Christian baptism, but immersion on

profession of faith, and we, therefore, exclude very many who they admit"!"

Paedobaptists of course differ with Baptists on the propriety of baptiz­

ing infants, and could welcome those baptized as infants or believers to the

Lord's Supper. For them, communion would not be denied to someone due

to infant baptism, but historically, Catholics and Lutherans have limited

communion to members of their denomination, because only such persons

117
share their view of the meaning of the Lord's Supper. Furthermore, advo­

cates of open communion think it is harsh, unloving, and offensive to

exclude any true believers from the Lord's Table.!" They may also point out

that baptism is a secondary doctrine, not required for salvation, and that it

has been widely disputed in the course of church history. They think it of

insufficient importance to make the lack of it a barrier to the Lord's Supper.

Those who support closed communion offer three reasons for their

position. First, it is a logical outgrowth of the Baptist view of the church.!"

If the Lord's Supper is for the church, and the church is entered via believ-

baptized members of Baptist churches. Greg Wills, "Sounds from Baptist History;' in The Lord's

Supper: Remembering and Proclaiming Christ until He Comes, 285, n. 1 .

114. For statements from Lutherans, Presbyterians, and Catholics on this, see Hammett, 40 Questions

about Baptism and the Lord's Supper, 261.

115. Allison, Sojourners and Strangers, 400.

116. Dagg, Manual of Theology, 214.

117. Hammett, 40 Questions about Baptism and the Lord's Supper, 262-63.

118. Ibid., 214-25. Dagg enumerates ten objections open communionists make against strict

communion, but these two seem the most substantive. More recently, Leonard Vander Zee has

seen the refusal of Baptists to recognize the infant baptism of those who are clearly believers, as

"disrespectful of the faith of others" (Vander Zee, Christ, Baptism and the Lord's Supper, 1 3 3 ). But

the same could be said of those who ask fellow believers to go against what they conscientiously

believe to be the teaching of the Bible and the historic position of their denomination for most

of its history.

119. The Baptist Faith and Message 2000 (VIL Baptism and the Lord's Supper) makes this connection

clear. Speaking of baptism, it says, "Being a church ordinance, it [believer's baptism] is

prerequisite to the privileges of church membership and the Lord's Supper:' Similarly, the Lord's

Supper is described as an act for "members of the church:'

MORE THAN SIMPLE SYMBOLS 329

er's baptism, only baptized believers should come to the Lord's Table. The

first part of this syllogism, that the Lord's Supper is for the church, is widely

supported. First Corinthians 1 1 distinguishes between meals the members

eat in their homes ( 1 Cor. 1 1 :22) and the special occasion when they come

together as a church to celebrate the Lord's Supper (v. 2 0 ) . The text seems

to regard it as a special observance just for the church. Therefore, it would

be limited to the church's members, who, according to the overwhelming

majority of Baptists, must receive believer's baptism to be members.

Second, those who support closed communion argue that it is required

by the horizontal aspect of the meaning of the Lord's Supper-that is, that

it calls us to look around in fellowship. We noted that 1 Corinthians 1 0 : 1 7

and 1 1 : 1 7 - 2 2 link the celebration of the Lord's Supper to the unity of the

body, not just unity among Christians in general but the unity of a local

body. This would seem to point toward local-church-only communion,

and I would argue that the members of the local congregation would expe­

rience the horizontal aspect much more deeply than visitors, even Chris­

tian visitors. But most of those who practice closed communion have

been willing to extend communion to those visiting from a church "of

like faith and order;' meaning a church that practices believer's baptism,

even if such visitors cannot fully experience the depth of fellowship that

the members of that local church can. But those visiting from a church

that practices infant baptism would not only miss the horizontal aspect of

fellowship; their participation in the Lord's Supper would also be seen as

inappropriate due to the third reason for closed communion.

A third reason for supporting closed communion is that open commu­

nion denigrates baptism and the importance of obeying Christ's command

to be baptized. As Marc Cortez puts it, "Open communion at least raises

questions about how important the initiatory rite of baptism can possibly be

if a person can participate fully in the ongoing rite of Communion.'!" even

in the absence of what Baptists have historically seen as legitimate baptism.

Dagg asks "why should baptism be trodden under foot, to open the way
121
of access to the eucharist?" In fact, Mark Dever says the command to be

baptized is so serious that if someone was admitted to church member­

ship, but refused to obey such a clear command of Christ, such a person

120. Marc Cortez, "Who Invited the Baptist?" in Come, Let Us Eat Together, eds. George Kalantis and

Marc Cortez (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2 0 1 8 ) , 217.

121. Dagg, Manual of Theology, 225.

330 CHAPTER 1 1

122
would have to be disciplined immediately. Such discipline would involve

exclusion from the Lord's Supper, for a member under discipline couldn't

affirm a genuine unity with the body. Timothy George, discussing a number

of historical advocates of open communion in Baptist life, acknowledges

that they "emphasized Christian unity and charity at the expense of rele­

gating both baptism and the Lord's Supper to the status of non-essential

ceremonials"!" Closed communion seems to preserve a more proper

respect for Christ's command for believers to be baptized.

Until fairly recently, most Baptists have historically favored closed

communion. There have been notable exceptions, such as John Bunyan,

124
Robert Hall, and C. H. Spurgeon, and historically the Free Will Baptists
125
have always advocated open communion. But most major Baptist

confessions of faith, especially American Baptist confessions, have

supported closed communion, as have their major theologians, such as J.

L. Dagg and A. H. Strong. For example, the Principles of Faith of the Sandy

Creek Association states, "the church has no right to admit any but regular

baptized church members to communion at the Lord's table.'!" The New

Hampshire Confession of Faith and all three versions of the Baptist Faith

and Message have seen baptism as "prerequisite to the privileges of church

membership and to the Lord's Supper:'

In the twentieth century, there was movement away from closed

communion toward open communion. By 1 9 1 1 , Northern Baptists had

sufficiently relaxed their standards that they were able to merge with the

historically open communion Free Will Baptists of the North, and, accord­

ing to Leon McBeth, since the middle of the twentieth century, "one rarely

hears of closed communion.'!" But while McBeth may accurately reflect a

trend in Baptist churches, there are still defenders of closed communion.

Stanley Grenz says, "baptism properly precedes participation in the Lord's

122. Dever, A Display of God's Glory, 52-53.

123. Timothy George, "Controversy and Communion: The Limits of Baptist Fellowship from Bunyan

to Spurgeon;' in The Gospel in the World: International Baptist Studies, ed. David Bebbington,

Studies in Baptist History and Thought, vol. 1 ( Carlisle, UK and Waynesboro, GA: Paternoster,

2002), 54.

124. Ibid., 38-58.

125. Lumpkin, Baptist Confessions of Faith, 369-76, gives the 1953 version of their A Treatise of the

Faith and Practices of the Original Free Will Baptists, which states: "It is the privilege and duty of

all who have spiritual union with Christ to commemorate His death, and no man has a right to

forbid these tokens to the least of his disciples:'

126. Ibid., 358.

127. McBeth, Baptist Heritage, 697.

MORE THAN SIMPLE SYMBOLS 331

Supper. . . . The reaffirmation of our personal loyalty to Christ inherent in

the Lord's Supper presupposes our initial declaration of loyalty made in

baptism"!" Timothy George says that the defenders of closed communion

who opposed Bunyan, Hall, and Spurgeon "were right to take seriously the

covenantal and disciplinary dimensions of Baptist ecclesiology. The Lord's

Supper, no less than baptism, is a mark of the true church, not a trivial

ceremony or matter of indifference within the covenanted community"

However, he also adds, "the open communionists were right to extend

eucharistic hospitality in the spirit and love of Jesus"!"

Whatever the reason, open communion has become the majority

practice of Southern Baptists. Greg Wills sees the transition in Southern

Baptist life as beginning around 1 9 5 0 , when open communion began to be

tolerated, though the great majority of churches at that time (89 percent)

still practiced closed communion. But a 1 9 9 0 poll of SBC pastors found

a massive change: 45 percent invited all professing believers to partake

and 3 1 percent left the Lord's Supper open to any individual "who felt

invited.v" A more recent poll shows a sharp drop in the number of

churches who allow anyone who wants to participate ( only 5 percent), but

a majority do practice traditional open communion, in which any believer

is invited to partake (52 percent). A little more than one-third ( 3 5 percent)

still limit participation to baptized believers.!"

I regard this as a difficult decision. Open communion certainly seems

to be a more hospitable policy. Many Baptists have found that differences

concerning baptism have not hampered their fellowship with non- Baptists

in parachurch gatherings such as Promise Keepers or college groups

like InterVarsity or Cru. And Baptists themselves insist that baptism is

secondary, not essential to salvation. It seems reasonable to welcome all

of the Lord's people to the Lord's Table. And some would argue that open

communion is more missionally effective.l"

128. Grenz, Theology for the Community of God, 702. Marc Cortez, too, sees Baptist convictions as

leading to closed communion, though also acknowledging such a conclusion as a theological

"knot" he "will not even attempt to untie" (Cortez, "Who Invited the Baptist?': 2 1 8 ) .

129. George, "Controversy and Communion:' 58.

130. Wills, "Sounds from Baptist History:' in The Lord's Supper: Remembering and Proclaiming Christ

until He Comes, 3 0 9 - 3 1 1 .

131. Carol Pipes, "Lifeway Survey Lord's Supper Practices of SBC Churches:' 1 .

132. Wills says new practices, like open communion, were adopted, in spite of the fact that they

were contrary to Baptist ecclesiology, because "they promised to increase spiritual vitality and

missional effectiveness:' Wills, "Sounds from Baptist History:' 3 1 2 .

332 CHAPTER 1 1

But on balance, the case for closed communion seems stronger. Here,

recalling the meaning of the Lord's Supper gives guidance. Certainly, any

believer can look back and remember, look ahead and anticipate, and

perhaps look within in self-examination, though I am not sure how she

could renew her love for the body of believers if she has no connection to

it. But how could someone with no connection to that local church, some­

one not even a member of a church of like faith and order, meaningfully

look around in fellowship? It is true that all believers are fellow members

of the universal body of Christ, but that is not the point in the teaching in

1 Corinthians 1 0 : 1 7 and 1 1 : 1 7 - 3 4 . It would seem to me that the members

of that local church who partake of the Lord's Supper would most fully

experience the meaning of the Lord's Supper; those visiting from a church

of like faith and order could experience the meaning of the Lord's Supper

in a true but lesser sense; and those from a church that did not practice

believer's baptism may experience the meaning of the Lord's Supper in a

true but much lesser sense. Moreover, such persons also bump up against

the second and traditional defense of closed communion: the connection

between church membership, baptism and the Lord's Supper.

Almost all accept that baptism is the rite of entry into the church

and that the Lord's Supper is for the church, the Lord's people. Virtually

all accept that the proper order is baptism first, then the Lord's Supper.

Baptists differ from defenders of open communion only in what they

regard as valid baptism. Without intending any disrespect to the genuine

faith which Baptists see and applaud in many paedobaptist brothers and

sisters, we cannot regard baptism as something similar to the issue of the

millennium, about which Baptists cheerfully disagree. A particular posi­

tion on it or similar eschatological issues would never be a test for fellow­

ship or a condition for participation in the Lord's Supper. But baptism is

a command of Jesus. Despite the lengthy practice of infant baptism, we

think the case for it is lacking and the case for believer's baptism compel­

ling. To accept the validity of infant baptism would, for conscientious

Baptists, constitute a betrayal of conscience.

This does not mean that closed communion would necessitate a harsh,

unloving practice. All churches that limit the Lord's Supper to believers

only have to make some restriction. Such restrictions can be explained

as necessitated by the nature and meaning of the ordinance. Those asked

not to partake because they are non-believers can be invited to observe

and ponder what these Christians are doing and why. Those asked not to
MORE THAN SIMPLE SYMBOLS 333

participate because they are not what Baptists regard as baptized can be

invited to pray for the unity and strengthening of the church they are visit­

ing. Some churches may want to celebrate the Lord's Supper, not in public

worship services but in members-only meetings. All these can be done

without being harsh or hateful. There are many contexts in which believers

can enjoy fellowship across denominational lines; must the Lord's Supper

be one of them, or does its meaning require some further limitation?

This rationale for closed communion will make little sense, however, if

Baptist church membership involves no genuine commitment to the body

and if the Lord's Supper involves no genuine renewal of that commitment.

Therefore, the recovery of meaningful church membership must proceed

if the practice of closed communion is to be well grounded and credible.

Frequency of Celebration

How often should a church observe the Lord's Supper? There is no

command in Scripture, though there is at least a hint of weekly observance

in Acts 20:7. A 2 0 1 2 survey found that 57 percent of Southern Baptist

churches observe the Lord's Supper quarterly, 1 5 percent do so slightly

more often ( 5 - 1 0 times a year), 1 8 percent monthly, only 1 percent weekly,

133
and a surprising 8 percent less than once a quarter (0-3 times per year).

My sense is that there is some, but still small, movement toward more

frequent participation, perhaps as Baptists recover a more meaningful

134
practice of the Lord's Supper.

There are two reasons why most Baptists seem satisfied with quar­

terly observance. The first is the fear that a too-frequent observance would

make the ordinance less special or significant and more routine and

meaningless. However, it is worth noting that no Baptist pastor I know

objects to weekly offerings and sermons. The second objection, while

rarely articulated, is the concern that the time devoted to the preaching of

the Word would be curtailed and that the preaching of the Word should

have primacy. Perhaps a third reason would be that many Baptists do not

find the Lord's Supper very meaningful, and four times a year seems more

than enough to them.

133. Pipes, "Life Way Surveys Lord's Supper Practices of SBC Churches;' 1-2.

134. If the Lord's Supper exists solely for us to remember Christ and proclaim his death, perhaps

quarterly would be sufficient. But if God ordained the Lord's Supper as a means of sustaining

Christians as they obey in faith, then it would seem to warrant more frequent observance. For

more on this topic, see Hammett, 40 Questions about Baptism and the Lord's Supper, 289-94.
334 CHAPTER 1 1

In the absence of a scriptural command, it seems difficult to insist

upon one pattern, though quarterly seems too infrequent to me, for

it means that if one happens to be sick or out of town on the Sunday

when communion is observed, six months could pass between times

of participation. I do agree that weekly observance could involve some

difficulties, and so I recommend monthly observance, alternating

between morning and evening services, for churches that have services

at both times. But this is a matter that can be left to the preference of

individual churches.

The Proper Elements

Occasionally there is some discussion concerning how closely

churches today should seek to replicate the exact elements of the Lord's

Supper. For example, some younger Baptists question why we drink

grape juice when the early church drank wine. The answer to that ques­

tion has to do with Baptist support for the late nineteenth-century

temperance movement. Inspired by that movement, Thomas Bramwell

Welch developed a process for producing unfermented grape juice, and

by the end of the nineteenth century most Baptists in America adopted

135
it. The use of a common cup has also been advocated by some as better

symbolizing the unity of the body and fitting the circumstances of the
136
original institution of the ordinance by Jesus. But health concerns

have led most Baptists to use the individual cups and trays invented by a
137
rural preacher in Ohio in 1 8 9 3 .

All these questions seem to miss the point. Jesus was simply using the

most common food and drink of his day. Grape juice and bread cannot be

mandatory, for the church exists in cultures where there are no grapes and

wheat is not grown. The symbolism of nourishment should be expressed

in the elements, and for that reason I prefer loaves of real bread to the

prefabricated pellets that are distasteful in every sense of the word. Real

loaves also fit the symbolism of a body being broken much better than tiny

pellets or wafers.

135. Welch's unfermented communion wine became widely popular later as Welch's grape juice. See

G. Thomas Halbrooks, "Communion;' in A Baptist's Theology, ed. R. Wayne Stacy (Macon, GA:

Smyth & Helwys, 1999), 184.

136. Millard Erickson, "The Lord's Supper;' in Basden and Dockery, eds., The People of God, 57.

137. Moody, The Word of Truth, 472.

MORE THAN SIMPLE SYMBOLS 335

But all these are issues to be left to the discretion of individual

churches. Using real wine would cause more problems than it would be

worth; individual cups are safer than a common cup; and loaves of bread

are better symbolically and aesthetically than wafers, but all these are

matters of taste and wisdom, not doctrine.!"

The Proper Atmosphere

I raise this issue because the observance of the Lord's Supper may

be one of the next areas where differing conceptions of worship collide.

Millard Erickson discusses whether the tone of the Lord's Supper service

should be solemn or joyous and sees the answer to that question as shaped

by underlying assumptions about the nature of worship. Particularly, he

contrasts the traditional idea of worship, which he sees as focusing on the

objective fact of what is being observed, to the more contemporary idea of

139
worship, which he sees as more subjective and feeling oriented.

I am not at all sure that Erickson treats contemporary worship fairly,

but he does raise an important issue. For many people, the Lord's Supper is

one of the most solemn occasions of the church's life. Yet both Erickson and

A. H. Strong note that it should be a festive occasion. Strong's words are

particularly interesting, since they were written about a century ago, long

before contemporary worship was ever imagined: "Gloom and sadness are

foreign to the spirit of the Lord's Supper. The wine is the symbol of the

death of Christ, but of that death by which we live. It reminds us that he

140
drank the cup of suffering in order that we might drink the wine of joY:'

In truth, the atmosphere in which we celebrate the Lord's Supper

should be the same as that which marks all genuine Christian worship,

one of both awe and praise. It is an awesome, unimaginable thing that

Christ the eternal Son should give his body and blood for us, and only our

familiarity with it blinds us to its awesomeness. Yet it was for us, and as

we receive his blessing anew in the celebration of this ordinance, the only

appropriate response is one of joyful praise.

138. For more discussion of the elements, including those who argue the Lord's Supper should be an

actual meal, see Hammett, 40 Questions about Baptism and the Lord's Supper, 297-99. Continued

interest in this question is reflected in the short article I was asked to write on this topic for

The Gospel Coalition website. See John S. Hammett, "TGC Asks: Does Scripture Demand

Unleavened Bread in the Lord's Supper?': Gospel Coalition, March 14, 2016, https://www.

thegospelcoalition.org/ article/ does-scripture-demand- unleavened-bread- in - the-lords-supper.

139. Erickson, "The Lord's Supper;' 59-60.

140. Strong, Systematic Theology, 960; also Erickson, "The Lord's Supper:' 59.
336 CHAPTER 1 1

CONCLUSION

For most of Christian history, the Eucharist or Lord's Supper has been

the central act of Christian worship. Baptism, especially the baptism of

infants, has been a major family occasion. Baptists saw, correctly I think,

that both these ordinances had become distorted and proposed major

reforms. They denied sacramentally transmitted grace and the necessity

of the sacraments for salvation, and placed the preaching of the Word in

the center of worship. But in the process we may have overreacted and lost

some of the meaning these events are made to have for worship.

There are several practical suggestions that I think could help us

recover from our overreaction and restore a more meaningful practice of

the ordinances in Baptist life. The first would be simply to teach on them

with more depth and intentionality, perhaps as an important and integral

part of any new members' class. As something we do fairly often in the life

of the church, we commonly observe them, perhaps thinking they need

no explanation. But that is not the case.

With baptism, teach the biblical basis for believer's baptism and then

institute processes to implement it, assuring that as far as humanly possi­

ble, those presented as candidates for baptism are those who have given

a credible profession of faith. Explain especially the connection between

baptism and church membership, and have the church be involved, in

voting its approval of the recommendation that someone be baptized,

and approving those authorized to administer baptism and the Lord's

141
Supper. Then in the baptism itself, let the one being baptized give a

genuine profession of faith, beyond simply answering a yes-or-no ques­

tion. Then the baptism can be administered, on the basis of their profes­

sion of faith. I also personally like the practice of my church, of giving

joyful applause upon the emergence of each candidate from the waters,

but that may be a matter of personality.

For the Lord's Supper, I think there should be periodic teaching on

all five aspects of the meaning of the Lord's Supper. Then in the actual

celebration, prepare to kindly and respectfully articulate your church's

understanding of who should and should not participate. Include a time

for self-examination, leading those preparing to partake in renewing their

141. In many churches, the bylaws would authorize pastors as the appropriate agents to administer

baptism and the Lord's Supper, but in cases where a father or other person wants to administer

baptism, I think it would be wise to ask the church to approve, to remind the church that it is the

baptizing body. The same is the rationale for voting to approve the baptism of those requesting it.
MORE THAN SIMPLE SYMBOLS 337

repentance, renewing their faith in Christ, and renewing their love for the

body. Then, as the gathered and prepared body moves toward believing

obedience in what God has ordained, encourage an attitude of expec­

tancy. I prefer always using the words of institution from 1 Corinthians

1 1 : 2 3 - 2 6 (novelty is not always necessary). I see the manner of distribu­

tion and partaking (passing of the elements versus coming to the front,

eating and drinking in unison or as each arrives at the front, eating the

142)
elements separately or intinction as indifferent, as long as things are

done decently and in order. In terms of the elements, I do prefer actual

bread, to better connote the idea of the Lord's Supper as a place where we

may find spiritual nutrition.

Most of all, recognize that God has given us these observances, not

as burdens but as occasions for blessing. If we take the time to rightly

understand what God has given us, and practice them as acts of worship

in believing obedience, I believe God will be pleased with our worship,

and will respond, as he does to all believing obedience, with blessing.

STUDY QUESTIONS FOR PART 4

1. In what ways are the five ministries mentioned in chapter 1 0 provided

in your church? Are some ministries more foundational or impor­

tant than others? Why or why not?

2. Does your church have a process or plan designed to help someone

move from visitor to member to mature believer? What would need

to be some of the elements of such a plan or process?

3. Are you familiar with contemporary worship? What are some of the

objections raised to contemporary worship? To what degree are they

valid? What criticisms can be made of traditional worship, and to

what degree are they valid?

4. Is evangelism the natural result of a healthy Christian life or the

result of intentional efforts? What produces a church that ministers

effectively to its community?

5. Why do most Baptists call baptism and the Lord's Supper ordinances

rather than sacraments? Is the difference more than merely semantic?

6. Is baptism just a symbol of what happens in conversion, or is more

involved? What, if anything, does God do in baptism?

142. Intinction is the practice of dipping the bread in the cup and partaking of both together.
338 CHAPTER 1 1

7. Give the case for infant baptism as persuasively as possible, and then

tell how you would respond to it from a Baptist perspective.

8. How old do you think someone must be to be baptized or participate

in the Lord's Supper? Should it be immediately after conversion?

9. What do you think are the most important steps churches could

take to improve their practice in the areas of baptism and the Lord's

Supper?

BOOKS FOR FURTHER STUDY

Allison, Gregg. Sojourners and Strangers: The Doctrine of the Church.

Foundations of Evangelical Theology. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2 0 1 2 .

While a comprehensive textbook of ecclesiology, this work has an

especially strong section on the ordinances and a helpful section on

the ministries of the church, though with a slightly different approach

than this book.

Beasley-Murray, G. R. Baptism in the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerd­

mans, 1962. This is one of the classic books on baptism from a British

Baptist, providing a detailed exegesis of virtually every New Testa­

ment text related to baptism.

Carson, D. A., ed. Worship by the Book. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2002.

This book consists of a wonderful essay by D. A. Carson, and reflec­

tions on worship from Anglican, Free Church, and Reformed perspec­

tives. All three include sample orders of service and practical sugges­

tions for worship planning, along with helpful overviews of the large

literature on worship, including the contemporary worship wars.

Dagg, J. L. Manual of Theology; Second Part: A Treatise on Church Order.

Philadelphia: American Baptist Publication Society, 1858; reprint,

Harrisonburg, VA: Gano Books, 1 9 8 2 . This book shows the intense

interest and debate over the ordinances in the nineteenth century, and

gives responses to arguments for infant baptism and open commu­

nion still used today.

Hammett, John S. 40 Questions about Baptism and the Lord's Supper. Grand

Rapids: Kregel, 2 0 1 5 . Almost every topic addressed in the chapter on

the ordinances is addressed at greater length in this book, along with

many additional topics, especially the views of other denominations.

The forty-question format is very user-friendly.

MORE THAN SIMPLE SYMBOLS 339

Hellerman, Joseph. When the Church Was a Family: Recapturing Jesus'

Vision for Authentic Christian Community. Nashville: B & H Academic,

2009. Though primarily a book on the meaning of the church as

family, it also engages the ministry of fellowship in very helpful terms,

both theologically and practically.

Jewett, Paul K. Infant Baptism and the Covenant of Grace. Grand Rapids:

Eerdmans, 1978. Jewett gives a devastating treatment of the most

common Presbyterian argument for infant baptism: namely, that as

infants in Israel received the covenant sign of circumcision, so the

children of Christian parents should receive the covenant sign of

baptism. He shows that a proper understanding of covenant theology

leads to believer's baptism.

Ryken, Philip Graham, Derek W. H. Thomas, and J. Ligon Duncan III, eds.

Give Praise to God: A Vision for Reforming Worship. Phillipsburg, NJ:

P & R Publishing, 2003. This anthology contains a number of essays

giving guidance on issues like prayer and readings of Scripture in

worship, and defending a more traditional view of worship.

Warren, Rick. The Purpose Driven Church: Growth without Compromising

Your Mission and Message. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1 9 9 5 . From one

of the leading advocates of seeker-sensitive services, Warren's book

is already something of a classic. It covers the five ministries of the

church under the rubric of purposes, but does so drawing extensively

on the methods Warren has used in building Saddleback Community

Church into one of the largest and most vital churches in America. A

very practical and valuable book.

 PART 5

WHERE IS THE

CHURCH G O I N G ?
 C H A P T E R 1 2

AGAINST THE GRAIN

New Responses to a Changed Landscape

IN THIS LAST PART OF THE BOOK, we ask a question looking to the future:

Where is the church going? Chapter 12 answers this question from the

North American context. For the foreseeable future, the church in North

America in most cases will have to go against the grain of a culture that has

become, in the years since the first edition of this book was published, much

more decidedly post-Christian. We will sketch two major trends revealing

the context in which the church must minister, and look at six important

responses churches are making to that culture. Chapter 1 3 will broaden the

focus to look at the church globally. This book has dealt primarily with issues

most relevant to North America, especially Baptists in North America, but

in today's global village, important trends and developments in the rest of

the world will impact and be impacted by Baptists and Baptist churches.

THE CHANGED LANDSCAPE

In the first edition of this book, I spoke of the changing landscape in

North America, fueled by the forces of secularism and postmodemism.

In the 1980s and 1990s, the forces for change encountered resistance from

343
344 CHAPTER 1 2

those seeking to maintain traditional values, resulting in what was called

1
the culture wars. Today, while there is still more Christian influence in

North America than in most other parts of the world, and while there

are still some skirmishes in the culture wars, those wars seem to be abat­

ing, with most of the momentum on the side of secularism and postmod­

ernism. Russell Moore writes of "the collapse of the Bible belt," and "the

increasing marginalization of Christiani ti, He does not see this as a cause

for despair, but as an "opportunity to bear witness in a culture that often

2
does not even pretend to share our 'values." Ed Stetzer sees the shift to

a more clearly and obviously post-Christian culture as marking the loss

of "the Christians home court advantage." Another way to put it, in this

changed landscape churches will have to bear witness against the grain.

The Changed Landscape and Human Sexuality

Perhaps the clearest evidence of this changed landscape is in the area of

human sexuality. A 2 0 1 7 Gallup poll reports that "record percentages of U.S.

adults" approve of sexual acts outside of marriage ( 69% ), of same-sex sexual

acts (63 percent), and of having a baby outside of marriage (62 percent). A

significant minority (36 percent) even see viewing pornography as "morally

acceptable." These changes are not happening only among nonbelieving

Americans. While a majority of evangelicals still oppose same-sex marriage,

that majority is only 59 percent. And among young white evangelicals ( those

born after 1964), support of same-sex marriage, as of Iune 2 0 1 7 , was up to

5
47 percent, compared to only 29 percent in March 2 0 1 6 .

Moreover, while homosexuality generates the most headlines, changes in

how we view heterosexual activity outside of marriage is even more striking.

The traditional Christian view, that "sexual activity belongs exclusively within

marriage,' is a small minority view among single evangelicals: "A recent study

1. For two accounts of the culture wars, see Robert Wuthnow, The Struggle for America's Soul:

Evangelicals, Liberals & Secularism (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1989) and James Davison Hunter,

Culture Wars: The Struggle to Define America (New York: BasicBooks, 1 9 9 1 ) .

2. Russell Moore, Onward: Engaging the Culture without Losing the Gospel (Nashville: B & H, 2 0 1 5 ) ,

2, 5, 9.

3. Ed Stetzer, "How We Lead in Times of Cultural Shift;' Christianity Today, 1, https://www.

christianitytoday.com/ edstetzer/2017 /july/ shifting-leadership-trends.html, accessed 8/7/2017.

4. David Roach, "Gallup Poll Records 'Humbling' Moral Decline;' http://www.baptistpress.

com/48878/gallup-poll-records-humbling-moral-decline, accessed 5/16/2017.

5. Diana Chandler, "Pew: Gay Marriage Gains Favor of Younger White Evangelicals;' http://www.

bpnews.net/ 4 9 1 5 1 / pew-gay- marriage-gains-favor-of-younger-white-evangelicals, accessed

6/29/2017.
AGAINST THE GRAIN 345

reveals that 88 percent of unmarried young adults are having sex . . . . Of those

surveyed who self-identify as 'evangelical; 80 percent say they have had sex'"

Researcher Gina Dalfonzo reports the experiences she and many other single

Christians have had of "large numbers of people on dating sites who call

themselves 'Christian' but are all in favor of premarital sex'?

In such a context, churches can no longer assume that their moral views

are obvious or even make sense to nonbelievers (and even many believers).

8
We must articulate what in another age could be assumed. And we must

give reasons for our views, "with gentleness and respect" ( 1 Peter 3 : 1 5 ) .

Otherwise, our motives will be misunderstood and our ministries hindered.

In 2 0 1 6 , Lifeway Research asked one thousand Americans to answer this

question: "In general, what do you think motivates sincere religious believ­

ers who oppose sexual freedom?" Just under half (49 percent) saw faith

as the main motivation. Twenty percent gave "hate" as the motivation of

"sincere religious believers:' apparently thinking there could be no other

sensible motivation for opposing sexual freedom. Among those who listed

"none" as their religious preference, more than one-third (34 percent)

9
thought such Christians were motivated by hate.

6. Gina Dalfanzo, One By One: Welcoming the Singles In Your Church (Grand Rapids: Baker,

2 0 1 7 ) , 5 0 - 5 1 . The study cited was conducted by The National Campaign to Prevent Teen and

Unplanned Pregnancy, and can be found at http://www.thenationalcampaign.org/national-data/

default.aspx.

7. Ibid., 5 1 . Joel Willitts, a professor at North Park University, agrees. He says that after a few

years of teaching Christian college students and reading their papers, he has a good sense of

what Christian college students are thinking about sex, and "only a small minority of students

think sex should be saved for marriage" (Joel Willitts, "What Christian College Students

Are Saying about Sex . . . It May Surprise You;' Patheos, https://www.patheos.com/blogs/

euangelion/2015/04/what-christian-college-students-are-saying-about-sex- it-may-surprise­

you, accessed 7/27/2017.

8. Among the resources to help Christians think through these issues, see Todd Wilson, Mere

Sexuality: Rediscovering the Christian Vision of Sexuality (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2017);

Gerald Hiestand and Todd Wilson, eds., Beauty, Order, and Mystery: A Christian Vision of

Human Sexuality (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2017); R. Albert Mohler, Jr., We Cannot

Be Silent: Speaking Truth to a Culture Redefining Sex, Marriage, and the Very Meaning of Right

and Wrong (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2015); Preston Sprinkle, People to Be Loved: Why

Homosexuality Is Not Just an Issue (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2 0 1 5 ) ; Wesley Hill, Washed

and Waiting: Reflections on Christian Faithfulness & Homosexuality, updated and expanded ed.

(Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2016); Mark Yarhouse, Understanding Gender Dysphoria: Navigating

Transgender Issues in a Changing Culture (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2015); Andrew T.

Walker, God and the Transgender Debate (Epsom, Surrey, UK.: The Good Book Company, 2017);

and material by Sam Allberry and others at www.livingout.org.

9. Bob Smietana, "American Views on Sex, Religion Studied;' 2, at http://www.bpnews.net/49130/

americans-views-on-sex-religion-studied, accessed 6/27/2017.

346 CHAPTER 1 2

Human sexuality is just one of the many issues on which the Christian

faith and contemporary culture clash. The existence of absolute truth, the

uniqueness of Jesus as the only source of salvation, and the reality of human

fallenness are other areas in which churches will be called to go against the

grain." But in truth, this is nothing new. Since the New Testament, churches

have been believing what seemed to their world to be foolishness. But it is

important to recognize that since we are now, more than in the past genera­

tion, going against the grain, we must shape our ministries accordingly.

The Changed Landscape and Religious Decline

Another related reality in the contemporary context is that of decline,

especially among those in the millennial generation ( those born from

1981 to 1996). The 2 0 1 5 Religious Landscape Survey, a survey of more

than 35,000 Americans conducted by the Pew Research Center, gave as its

number one finding, "Christians are declining, both as a share of the U.S.

population and in total number:' They found that drop corresponded with

"the continued rise in the share of Americans with no religious affiliation

(religious 'nones');' which rose from 8 percent of the adult population in

1990 to 1 6 . 1 percent in 2008 to 22.8 percent in 2 0 1 5 . 1 1 Sadly, 1 8 percent

of US adults who were raised as Christians or members of some religious

group, are now among the "nones:' And while the rise of the "nones" was

especially noticeable among the millennials, "the major trends seen in

American religion since 2007 -the decline of Christians and the rise of the

'nones' -have occurred in some form across many demographic groups.?"

Ed Stetzer cautions us not to draw too dire a conclusion from these

findings. He says, "Christianity is not dying; nominal Christianity is:' or

"Christianity is being refined:' Looking carefully at the data, he notes that

the drop among Christians and the rise among the "nones" is due to the fact

that "Americans whose Christianity was nominal-in name only-are cast­

ing aside that name. They are now aligning publicly with what they've actu-

10. In a 2014 survey of three thousand adults commissioned by Ligonier Ministries, Lifeway Research

found that close to half those surveyed ( 45 percent) believe the Bible was written for each person

to interpret as they choose; 45 percent also believe that there are many ways to heaven; and

two-thirds (67 percent) say most people are basically good. Bob Smietana, "Americans Believe

in Heaven, Hell and a Little Bit of Heresy;' 1- 7, at http://lifewayresearch.com/2014/10/28/

americans-believe-in-heaven-hell-and-a-little-bitof-heresy, accessed 6/29/2017.

11. Stetzer, "None of the Above;' 2.

12. Michael Lipka, "5 Key Findings About the Changing U.S. Religious Landscape;' 1-3, at http://www.

pewresearch.org!facat-tanl/2015/05/12.5-key-findings-u-s-religious-landscape/, accessed 7/18/2017.

AGAINST THE GRAIN 347

ally not believed all along:' By contrast, "convictional Christianity is rather

steady?" In fact, while the percentage of millennials identifying as "none:'

is quite high and increasing (35 percent), the percentage of millennials who

identify as evangelical was the same in 2 0 1 5 as it was in 2007: 2 1 percent.

But in at least one major evangelical denomination, decline has been

real, has been sustained for more than a decade now, and is a cause for

serious concern. In fact, I have recently had to face the fact that for the first

time in my life, I am a member of a declining denomination, the Southern

Baptist Convention. From a total membership of 16,306,246 in 2006 to

1 5 , 2 1 6 , 9 7 8 in 2 0 1 6 , Southern Baptists have experienced eleven years of

decline, in which they have lost more than 1 million members, or more
14
than 7 percent of their total membership. At least part of that decline

could be due to purely nominal members no longer being nominal, or

churches becoming more serious about meaningful membership and

removing many purely nominal members via church discipline. In fact, I

was not concerned for the first few years of membership decline, because

average weekly worship attendance was increasing. But since 2009, weekly

attendance too has been decreasing, from 6,207,488 in 2009 to 5 , 2 0 0 , 7 1 6

in 2 0 1 6 , a loss of more than 1 million in church attendance.

That too can be partly explained by the fact that members attend with

less frequency than in the past. Thom Rainer gives the example of a church

with attendance of 200. If one-half of those attenders miss one of four

weeks, average attendance drops to 1 7 5 , even though no members left the

church and everyone remained relatively active. Rainer believes this is the
15
number one reason for the decline in church attendance. Yet when all

possible allowances have been made, the reality of decline remains.

Also of concern to Baptists and others with strong denominational

convictions is the finding that those who are continuing their affiliation

with a church are increasingly nondenominational. A Gallup poll found

that whereas prior to 2000, "half of all Americans belonged to a specific

Protestant denomination'' today that number is down to 30 percent, while

13. Ed Stetzer, "Nominals to Nones: 3 Key Takeaways from Pew's Religious Landscape Survey;'

Christianity Today, http://www.christianitytoday.com/ edstetzer/2015/may/nominals-to-nones-

3-key-findings-from-pewsreligious-lands.html, accessed 7I 17/2017.

14. These changes can be tracked via the Annual Church Profile Statistical Summary, which

Southern Baptists publish annually.

15. Thom Rainer, "#1 Reason for the Decline in Church Attendance:' at http://thomrainer.

com/2013 /08/ thenumber-one- reason -for- the-decline- in -church-attendance-and-five-ways- to­

address- it, accessed 7 I 17/2017.

348 CHAPTER 1 2

the "proportion of Protestants in the United States who don't identify with

a specific denomination doubled between 2000 and 2 0 1 6 ; ' such that today,

one in six Americans are nondenominational Christians. The conclusion

drawn from the poll is, "Churches that adhere to specific and historical

denominational affiliations appear to face the biggest challenge in Ameri­

can Protestantism today?" This is another aspect of the "against the grain'

context churches (especially conscientiously denominational churches)

face, and to which they must respond.

These may not be the only changes churches will need to address in

the years to come. The growing role of technology in our culture has led to

a growing role for technology in our churches (from reading our Bibles on

a tablet or phone to hearing our pastor via DVD or closed circuit transmis­

sion to giving our offering via autodraft to completely online churches).

We may need to assess what responses such changes call for. Rather than

simply following the culture blindly, we may need to step back and analyze
17
what we are gaining and what we are losing. But I think those changes are

still in process and their impact may not yet be apparent. But the changes

in values and perceptions that make many aspects of the Christian faith

implausible, foolish or offensive and the change to living with a down­

ward trend in Christian affiliation in North America are two areas that are

apparent and call for response.

MAJOR RESPONSES

How then may or should churches respond to our current context?

There are many very specific responses being recommended. Ed Stetzer

says the response to decline is "more focus on sharing the Gospel, plant­

ing churches, engaging the culture, and joining Jesus on mission?" Thom

Rainer has five possible approaches to the problem of declining atten­

19
dance, focusing on developing meaningful membership. But rather than

16. Kate Shellnutt, "The Rise of the Nons: Protestants Keep Ditching Denominations;' Christianity

Today, 1-2, at http://www.christianitytoday.com/news/2017 /july/ rise-of-nons-protestants­

denominations-nondenominational.html, accessed 8/23/2017.

17. Media expert Marshall McLuhan developed four laws of media, the first two calling on us to

reflect on what the particular technology being considered enhances, intensifies, makes possible

or accelerates, and what the new technology pushes aside or makes obsolescent. In other words,

what do we gain and what do we lose? See Marshall McLuhan and Eric McLuhan, Laws of Media:

The New Science (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1988), 98-99.

18. Ed Stetzer, "Baptists: Reflections of the Stats GuY:' 3, at http://www.bpnews.net/47015/

baptistsreflections-of-the-stats-guy, accessed 7 I 1 8 / 2 0 1 7 .

19. Rainer, "#1 Reason for the Decline in Church Attendance;' 2-3.
AGAINST THE GRAIN 349

consider a multitude of specific responses, I want to point to six major

categories of responses. To some degree they overlap, but all are what I

would call major categories of response.

Contextualizing

In the first edition of this book, extensive consideration was given to

the seeker church movement, an important response to the changing land­

scape of fifteen or more years ago. My sense is that the seeker movement has

crested, but has left behind a major legacy: the crucial importance of contex­

tualization. The leaders of that movement urged us to get inside the minds

of those we are trying to reach and understand what it takes to communicate

with them. They may have gone too far in allowing the message to be unduly

shaped by the needs and desires of seekers, going beyond contextualization

20
to compromise, but contextualization takes on an even greater importance

in our changed context, where our message makes little sense to many.

Tim Keller gives a helpful definition of contextualization:

it is giving people the Bible's answers, which they may not at all want to

hear, to questions about life that people in their particular time and place are

asking, in language and forms they can comprehend, and through appeals

21
and arguments with force they can feel, even if they reject them.

This approach maintains the priority on the Bible; it supplies the

answers. But it pays attention to the context, to know the questions people

are asking, to learn the language and forms they find comprehensible and

to develop cogent arguments. This is a major response to the first change

we noted, that which sees the Christian message as foolish if not offensive.

This is what international missionaries have been doing for decades, if

22
not centuries. It leads us into the disputed question of how the Christian

(and churches) relate to culture. Of his definition of contextualization, Keller

says a contextualized presentation of the gospel «adapts and connects to the

20. See the analyses of Greg Pritchard, Willow Creek Seeker Services: Evaluating a New Way of Doing

Church (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1996); Kirnon Howland Sargeant, Seeker Churches: Promoting

Traditional Religion in a Nontraditional Way (New Brunswick, NJ and London: Rutgers

University Press, 2000); and Alan Wolfe, The Transformation of American Religion: How We

Actually Live Out Our Faith (New York: Free Press, 2003).

21. Keller, Center Church, 89. Emphasis in original.

22. A. Scott Moreau surveys dozens of approaches to contextualization in Contextualization in

World Missions: Mapping and Assessing Evangelical Models (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2 0 1 2 ) .
350 CHAPTER 1 2

23
culture, yet at the same time challenges and confronts it:' Most discussions

of the Christ-and-culture question begin with the classic book by H. Richard

Niebuhr, Christ and Culture, and his famous five ways of relating Christ to

culture: Christ against culture, Christ of culture, Christ above culture, Christ
24
and culture in paradox, and Christ transforming culture. While his five

approaches have been subject to critique, the question of how to relate to

the changed culture in which they exist is a question churches will do well

to think through carefully, and at least four of Niebuhr's models are being
25
utilized as responses. Indeed, my own conviction is that our response to

culture should not consist of just one of these models, because culture is not

monolithic. There are some aspects of culture we can applaud and incorpo­

rate, some that may be genuinely neutral, and much today that must be reso­

lutely resisted. One approach will not be appropriate for every situation. But

the changed cultural landscape of today calls for churches to become students

of their culture and skilled in contextualization. Though his urban context

makes some aspects of his view distinctive, I think Tim Keller offers very

valuable pastoral advice on how to understand culture and thus contextualize

26
well, and Kevin Vanhoozer gives a detailed model for reading cultural texts

along with examples of how his students have used his method to interpret

various cultural texts and trends, from the checkout line at a grocery store, to

27
the movie Gladiator, to the blogosphere. I believe contextualization based

on thoughtful engagement with the culture will be increasingly necessary

for churches as they sail into a cultural wind that will often be against them.

Going Missional

A very closely related but slightly different response is denoted by the

term missional. Those in the missional church camp agree on the need

for contextualization, but they see the term missional as a new term and a

new strategy for cultural engagement. Such churches may adopt a "Christ

against culture" or "Christ transforming culture" or other approach to

23. Ibid.

24. H. Richard Niebuhr, Christ and Culture (New York: Harper & Row, 1 9 5 1 ) .

25. D. A. Carson has sharply criticized the "Christ of culture'' view, and suggests that we should

"perhaps envisage a fourfold rather than a fivefold scheme'' ( Christ and Culture Revisited [ Grand

Rapids and Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans, 2008], 36).

26. Keller devotes two large segments of Center Church to contextualization (89-134 and 1 8 1 - 2 4 3 .

The chart on 231 especially deserves careful pondering.

27. See Kevin Vanhoozer, Charles Anderson and Michael Sleasman, eds., Everyday Theology: How

to Read Cultural Texts and Interpret Trends (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2007).
AGAINST THE GRAIN 351

culture, but they will be used in service to a missional approach to the

world. The term "missional church', was first highlighted by the 1998

publication of Missional Church: A Vision for the Sending of the Church

28
in North America. This book came out of discussions within ecumenical

circles, particularly a group called The Gospel and Our Culture Network.

Soon the term was adopted by a wide variety of churches, though not with

9
a uniform understanding of what it means for a church to be missional.2

As Alan Roxburgh quipped, the term missional has gone "from obscurity

to banality in eight short years and people still don't know what it means":"

In this book, missional will be used to describe the posture of a church

in relationship to the world around it. As Ed Stetzer describes it, "Missional

means adopting the posture of a missionary, learning and adapting to the

culture around you while remaining biblically sound,"!' It requires contex­

tualization, but by using the term "missional," we are adding another layer.

We are called not only to consider culture, but also to consider the church's

mission in and to that culture.

The question of the mission of the church has also been the subject

32
of some controversy. Kevin De Young and Greg Gilbert seek to give a

very precise and focused answer to that question. The mission of the

church, they say, is not every good thing a Christian may do, nor every

thing a Christian does in obedience to Christ. Rather, cc [ t]he mission of

the church is to go into the world and make disciples by declaring the gospel

of Jesus Christ in the power of the Spirit and gathering these disciples into

churches, that they might worship the Lord and obey his commands now

and in eternity to the glory of God:,33 But most within the missional church

movement see the mission of the church in broader terms, as linked to

the mission of God. Christopher Wright defines the mission of the church

28. Darrell Guder, ed., Missional Church: A Vision for the Sending of the Church in North America

(Grand Rapids and Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans, 1998).

29. See a brief summary of the development of the term in Nathan Finn and Keith Whitfield, "The

Missional Church and Spiritual Formation;' in Spirituality for the Sent: Casting a New Vision

for the Missional Church, eds. Nathan Finn and Keith Whitfield (Downers Grove, IL: IVP

Academic, 1 4 - 1 6 .

30. Alan Roxburgh, "The Missional Church;' Theology Matters 10, no. 4 (September/October 2004): 2.

31. Ed Stetzer, Planting Missional Churches (Nashville: B & H Academic, 2006), 1 9 .

32. For a discussion of this controversy in the larger missiological community, see Craig Ott, ed., The

Mission of the Church: Five Views in Conversation (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2016). For

views within the evangelical community, see Jason Sexton, gen. ed., Four Views on the Church's

Mission (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2 0 1 7 ) .

33. Kevin De Young and Greg Gilbert, What Is the Mission of the Church? Making Sense of Social Justice,

Shalom, and the Great Commission (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2 0 1 1 ) , 62. Emphasis in original.
352 CHAPTER 1 2

as "our committed participation as God's people, at God's invitation and

command, in God's own mission within the history of God's world for the

redemption of God's creationi?' Or as Nathan Finn and Keith Whitfield put

it, "Being missional means being directed by the mission of God;' and "living
35
sent on the mission of God:'

This latter view of the mission of the church is broader than the first,

including matters like creation care and social justice, but without unduly

diminishing the importance of evangelism. If missional means being sent

into the world, we need to remember that the church is sent into the world

"with an evangelistic calling,"?" That is not the whole of the church's call­

ing, but it is an important aspect, arguably the most important aspect, for

it is one with eternal consequences.

In my opinion, the most important aspect of the missional response

for churches today is the sense that the church is not to wait for the world

to come to the church; rather the church is sent into the world. Michael

Frost and Alan Hirsch see the missional posture as calling the church

to move from an attractional model, in which a church plants itself in a

neighborhood, offers programs, and expects nonbelievers to come, to an

incarnational approach, in which the church seeks to "leave its own reli­

gious zones" to seep "into the host culture like salt and light;' and "to be an

infiltrating, transformational community?" But the church sent into the

world must nonetheless maintain its distinctiveness as a contrast commu­

nity, for it is by its very difference that it attracts nonbelievers. Michael

Goheen argues, "Only when the church is a faithful embodiment of the

kingdom as part of the surrounding culture yet over against its idolatry

will its life and words bear compelling and appealing testimony to the

good news that in Jesus Christ a new world has come and is corning?"

In the contemporary context, in which the church is declining, it will

not do for churches to sit back and simply wait for the world to come. A

missional posture in which churches see themselves as sent into the world to

serve the world, yet without losing their distinctive identity, will be increas-

34. Christopher Wright, The Mission of God: Unlocking the Bible's Great Narrative (Downers Grove,

IL: IVP Academic, 2006), 23. Emphasis in original.

35. Finn and Whitfield, "The Missional Church and Spiritual Formation:' 27-28. Emphasis in original.

36. Ibid., 28.

37. Michael Frost and Alan Hirsch, The Shaping of Things to Come: Innovation and Mission for the
1
21' -Century Church (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2003), 30.

38. Michael Goheen, A Light to the Nations: The Missional Church and the Biblical Story (Grand

Rapids: Baker Academic: 2 0 1 1 ) , 5.

AGAINST THE GRAIN 353

ingly important in the days ahead. And, as Ed Stetzer emphasizes, missional

39
churches must be both culturally relevant and biblically faithful.

Going Large

As noted above, declining church affiliation is one of the key recent

changes in the North American landscape. But that decline has not been

uniform. It has been more pronounced among mainline churches and Cath­

olics than evangelicals:" it has been more pronounced among millennials

than boomers; and it has been more pronounced among smaller churches

than megachurches. Now most churches cannot simply choose to be larger

as a response to the changed landscape; if they could, many would. But it

may be helpful to see why it is that megachurches are growing when most

are declining. It may be that larger churches simply have more resources, but

there may also be some factors in the growth of large churches that smaller

churches could adopt, even those with modest resources.

First, it is worth noting that at least through 2 0 1 4 , research indicates

that churches that have reached megachurch status are continuing to grow.

The 2 0 1 5 Megachurch Survey by Hartford Institute for Religion Research

and Leadership Network found the median growth rate for megachurches

( defined as those with two thousand or more present at weekly worship

41
gatherings) was 26 percent over the five-year period 2 0 0 9 - 2 0 1 4 . Not

only are the individual megachurches growing, the total number of mega­

churches is increasing (from around six hundred megachurches in 2000 to

42
at least 1,642 by the latest count).

What is it about megachurches that has enabled them to buck the tide of

declining church affiliation in the US? While it is impossible to pinpoint one

factor, or to prove cause and effect, the Megachurches 2 0 1 5 Report did find

a number of areas in which megachurches are significantly different from

other congregations. These areas are not dependent on the larger resources

of megachurches and so may be points for consideration by other churches.

39. Stetzer, Planting Missional Churches, 20-21. See the caption on the cover: "Planting a Church

That's Biblically Sound and Reaching People in Culture:'

40. Lipka, "5 Key Findings;' 2.

41. Scott Thumma and Warren Bird, "Recent Shifts in America's Largest Protestant Churches:

Megachurches 2015 Report;' 2, hirr.hartsem.edu/megachurch/2015_Megachurches_Report.

pdf, accessed 7/22/2017.

42. Aaron Earls, "Where Are All the Megachurches?" https://factsandtrends.net/2017 /06/09/where­

areall-the-rnegachurches, accessed 7 / 1 7 / 2 0 1 7 . Earls gives the megachurch database from the

Hartford Institute for Religion Research as the source for his data.
354 CHAPTER 1 2

A number of factors cluster around "clarity of mission and purpose?"

Members of megachurches and members of other congregations were asked

if they "strongly agree" that the following phrases describe their church:

• Has a clear mission and purpose (79% megachurch members; 4 1 %

other church members)

• Is spiritually vital and alive ( 5 1 % compared to 29%)

• Is quite different from other congregations in our community ( 4 1 %

to 2 1 %)

• Is willing to change to meet new challenges ( 3 7% to 1 7 % )

This last factor deserves further consideration. While the data indi­

cate that "innovation and willingness to change are strongly correlated to

growth and health."? and while such willingness is much more prevalent

among megachurches than other congregations, it is a challenge to main­

tain, even for megachurches. In 2 0 1 0 , 54 percent of megachurch members

reported strong agreement with the phrase "willing to change to meet new

challenges;" that percentage dropped to 37 percent in the 2 0 1 5 survey.

Another factor involved in megachurch growth seems to be small

groups: "Megachurches continue to have a very high level of intentional

use of small groups':" As megachurches, they may be better able to offer a

wide variety of types of small groups (including but not limited to Sunday

school), but most churches should be able to offer some type of small group

experience. And there is a strong correlation between intentionality about

small groups and perception of spiritual vitality in these megachurches.

Megachurches are doing better at attracting young people than other

congregations, with 64 percent reporting an increase in young adults ( ages

18-34) from 2 0 1 1 to 2 0 1 4 . Not surprisingly, megachurches that view minis­

try to young adults as a top priority have a larger percentage of young adults

in their churches. What may be surprising is that the programs for young

adults are largely designed for premarital and married young adults rather

than single young adults, while two-thirds in the 18-34 age group are single,

and are waiting longer to marry. Megachurches and other churches are not

doing as well in attracting young singles-perhaps due to some conflict

43. All the data in this section is from Thumma and Bird, "Recent Shifts:' and is derived from the

2015 Megachurch Survey.

44. Thumma and Bird, "Recent Shifts:' 1 1 .

45. Ibid., 4.
AGAINST THE GRAIN 355

between evangelical teaching on sexual morality and the changing views on

sexuality among young adults, perhaps due to an overemphasis on young

families and a lack of emphasis on ministry to single adults. In view of the

growing number of young adult singles, churches need to prepare them­

selves to engage the changing views on sexuality with understanding of

those changing views and better preparation in presenting the case for their
46
view, and then give ministry to singles the high priority it deserves.

Multiplying Sites

There is a large and growing overlap between megachurches and

multisite churches." The very existence of multiple sites affords such

churches opportunities to contextualize specifically to local communities

and be missional, and thus many multisite churches could be considered as

examples of contextualized and missional churches. Yet there are aspects

of multisite churches that are distinct from contextualized, missional, and

megachurches. Thus, multisite churches warrant separate consideration.

They will be discussed here as a fourth major response to the changed

landscape in which churches must operate today.

Few would dispute the claim that multisite churches have experienced

an explosion of growth in the twenty-first century. From more than 1,500 in

2006 to eight thousand in 2 0 1 4 , the growth of multisite churches, especially

in the midst of overall declining church affiliation, has been and continues
48
to be impressive. But beyond the fact of their amazing growth in popular­

ity and the basic definition ("one church meeting in two or more locations
49)
under one overall leadership and budget" it is difficult to say very much

about multisite churches as a whole. In his 2 0 1 1 doctoral dissertation, Brian

Frye distinguished sixteen different varieties of multisite churches." what is

46. For more specific ideas on ministering to young single adults, see Dalfonzo, One by One,

especially 149-227.

47. As of 2 0 1 5 , 63 percent of megachurches meet at multiple sites, and another 10% are considering

it. This is up from 46 percent in 2010 (Thumma and Bird, "Recent Shifts;' 4).

48. For the number as of 2006, see Geoff Surratt, Greg Ligon, and Warren Bird, The Multi-Site

Church Revolution (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2006), 9; for the 2014 number, see Warren

Bird, "Now More Than 8,000 Multisite Churches:' at http://leadnet.org/now-more-than-8000-

multisite-churches/, accessed 7/26/2017. I hav

49. This is the definition given by Bird, "Now More Than 8,000 Multisite Churches:' It is a shortened

form of the fuller definition given in Surratt, Ligon, and Bird, Multi-Site Church Revolution, 18:

''A multi-site church is one church meeting in multiple locations-different rooms on the same

campus, different locations in the same region, or in some instances, different cities, states, or

nations. A multi-site church shares a common vision, budget, leadership, and board:'

50. Brian Frye, "The Multi-Site Phenomenon in North America: 1950-2010" (PhD diss., Southern
356 CHAPTER 1 2

a strength ( or weakness) in one variety may not be true of all. In the discus­

sion here, we will try to speak mainly to issues that are true of all or the great

majority of multisite churches. When we speak of matters true of only some

multisite churches, we will try to make that clear.

The first and most obvious question is, why have they become so popular?

Why are they growing in a context of decline? The answers to these two ques­

tions may be different. To address the second question first, one reason why

multisite churches are growing is that there may be a self-selecting process

going on. To put it in other words, I suspect that few declining churches are

considering going multisite. It is usually not a strategy for reversing decline.

More often, it is a strategy for churches who are struggling with what to do

with existing growth, or a strategy of healthy churches desiring to broaden

their impact. Thus, it may not be surprising that multisite churches are grow­

ing. It seems likely that many of them were growing before they went multi­

site. But I would not deny that becoming multisite may have sparked addi­

tional growth in many churches, and in some cases going multisite may have

been a catalyst for a stalled church to resume growth.

For example, in the most prominent preaching model among multi­

sites, simulcast preaching, the preaching of one man is extended to all the
51
sites. Such men are often unusually gifted and their preaching tends to

attract many people. Moreover, as mentioned above, the fact that multisite

churches have multiple sites allows them to get more deeply into a commu­

nity, allowing them to better contextualize the gospel. Having a site in a

specific neighborhood enables the church to better know the needs of that

neighborhood, and thus do a better job being missional in their context.

Thus, there seem to be many reasons why multisite churches are growing.

The question of why they have become so popular is a bit different.

Brian Frye sees the emergence of multisite churches as linked to "three cata­

lytic factors:' First, economic advancement sparked the development of a

consumer society that accustomed people to demand options and appreciate

Baptist Theological Seminary, 2 0 1 1 ) , 179. Frye distinguishes the different models based on three

key characteristics: proximity of sites to one another (four varieties), preaching methodology

(five options), or process of multisiting (seven approaches). Frye lists Internet campus and

multiple services as additional possible varieties. While I think there are key differences between

multisite and multiservice, Internet campuses are becoming recognized as one option within

the multisite framework.

51. Simulcast preaching is used in nearly fifty percent of all multisite churches. See Warren Bird,

"Leadership Network/Generis Multisite Church Scorecard, " Leadership Network (2014), 18,

available via http://leadnet.org.

AGAINST THE GRAIN 357

franchises and brand names. Second, accelerated mobility allows multisite

churches to bring their pastoral teams together (even those whose congrega­

tions never gather in one place), and for multisites who use the roving pastor

model, mobility allows a pastor to travel from campus to campus. Third, and

most important, have been the technological innovations that have allowed

people to experience connection apart from face to face interaction. And for

the large number of churches that use simulcast preaching, technological

innovations have both made such preaching possible and accustomed people
52
to accept it. But while such developments may have been the necessary

prerequisites, they do not fully explain why they have become so popular.

There is little reflection on "why multisite?" in the literature produced

thus far. The earliest book, The Multi-Site Church Revolution, is much more

a how-to than a why-to book. When reasons are mentioned, they seem to

be largely pragmatic. Surratt, Ligon, and Bird say, "multi-site extensions

of trusted- name churches are something that connect well with today's

times;" multisiting allows churches to keep growing without the enormous

expense of building ever bigger buildings and parking lots; multisites allow

the church to be closer to where people are and allow the church to do a

better job ofloving people well, especially different types of people; multisite

churches are simply working well in reaching people, fulfilling the Great

Commission and Great Commandment. They summarize: "The reasons for

choosing to become a multi-site are as varied as the multi-site expressions

that have evolved, but the vast majority of multi-site congregations are find­

ing the experience to be a solid win for their mission as a church.?"

Granted that they have become popular and that most multisite

churches are growing, is this a good thing? Do multisite churches have

biblical and theological warrant? Is this a movement that should be

applauded or a distortion of the biblical model for a church? Multisite

54
churches have been criticized for many reasons. Some critique the

franchising and branding of churches as something that is contrary to

55
the New Testament vision of the church. Others have examined the

ecclesiology undergirding multisite churches and have concluded it

52. Frye, "Multi-Site Church Phenomenon;' 63-93.

53. Surratt, Ligon, and Bird, Multi-Site Church Revolution, 10, 12, 18, 25.

54. Perhaps the most complete list is from Jonathan Leeman, "Twenty-two Problems with Multi-site

Churches:' at https://www.9marks.org/ article/twenty-two-problems-with-multi-site-churches,

accessed 8/14/2017.

55. See Thomas White and John M. Yeats, Franchising McChurch: Feeding Our Obsession with Easy

Christianity (Colorado Springs: David C. Cook, 2009).

358 CHAPTER 1 2

"fails crucial tests of biblical prescription or precedent;' and is espe­

56
cially problematic for Baptists and their practice of congregationalism.

Thabiti Anyabwile has blogged, "Multi-Site Churches Are from the

Devil;' accusing them of fostering idolatry of a superstar pastor, compe­

tition and pride. He argues that multisites remove the "local" from "local

church;' and he questions the impact of technology. He thinks they give

too much weight to pragmatism and are in danger of cultural captiv­

57
ity. Perhaps the most common criticism has been that a church, by

its nature, is an assembly. "Assembly" is even a valid translation for the

Greek term ekklesia. But how can a body of people be an assembly if they
58
never assemble in one place at one time?

What are we to make of these criticisms? There seem to be several rebut­

tals those in the multisite church movement could offer. First, remember

the great variety of models within the multisite movement. Some actually

do assemble all together periodically, just not on every Sunday. Some have

a preaching pastor at every campus, alleviating the charges of fostering

idolatry of a pastor and uncritical use of technology. A second response

might be that some of the dangers seen in multisite churches are endemic

to the human heart (idolatry, pride, competition, cultural captivity). No

church is totally immune from them, and multisite are no more (or less)

susceptible than any other church form. A third response is to ask for a

better alternative. If more people are coming than the building can hold,

what are the options? To build a bigger building and parking lot may not

be good stewardship; to turn people away is unchristian; to plant churches

brings in other difficulties. Multisite may be least worst option in some

cases. But a fourth response is to give a positive case of biblical and theo­

logical support for multisite churches. Here we have the work of Gregg

Allison to draw upon. He accepts that many of the critiques of multisites

56. See Patrick Willis, "Multi-Site Churches and Their Undergirding Ecclesiology: Questioning Its

Baptist Identity and Biblical Validity" (PhD diss., Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary,

2014), 3.

57. Thabiti Anyabwile, "Multi-Site Churches Are from the Devil;' https://blogs.thegospelcoalition.

org/thabitianyabwile/2011/09/27 /multi-site-churches-are-from-the-devil, accessed 6/29/2017.

58. The 2009 9Marks efournal devoted the entire May-June 2009 issue to multisite churches. In

that issue, Thomas White, Jonathan Leeman, Bobby Jamieson, and Grant Gaines all critiqued

multisite churches for never assembling; Gaines extended the same criticism at length in

his dissertation ("One Church in One Location: Questioning the Biblical, Theological, and

Historical Claims of the Multi-Site Church Movement" [ PhD diss., Southern Baptist Theological

Seminary, 2 0 1 2 ] ) . The same point has been used to critique multiple service churches by Mark

Dever and Paul Alexander, The Deliberate Church (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2005), 87.
AGAINST THE GRAIN 359

have some validity, especially for some forms of multisites. But he believes

that there is biblical support and theological warrant for the form of multi­
59
site churches he advocates.

Biblically, Allison looks to New Testament references to "the church

that meets in the house» of a certain person (Rom. 1 6 : 5 ; Col. 4 : 1 5 ; Philem.

2 ) . Considering the number that could fit in a house, and the number of

Christians in a city like Corinth, it seems likely that smaller house church
60
gatherings met as a subset of the whole church. That pattern seems

almost certain in view of the size of the church in Jerusalem. The church

may have met as a whole in the temple, but the house meetings (Acts 2:46)

would have had to be subsets.

In my own thinking, it seems significant that Paul always refers to the

church within a city in the singular, "church:' Luke does the same in Acts.

But the one church in Jerusalem was far too large to fit in one house. It

seems likely that the same would be true of most other large cities. Thus it

seems largely that the one church in Jerusalem (and other cities) was not

regarded as one church because it assembled together; in fact, it operated

61
as a network of house churches, and yet was regarded as one church.

I think the unity of these early urban churches should be seen as rela­

tional unity, such as that indicated by Acts 2:44. All the three-thousand­

plus believers "were together;' not by all assembling in the same place at

the same time, but by caring for each other, sharing meals with smaller

groupings, and living in covenant relationship with each other. I think

this is why Paul may have always used the plural for the church scattered

over a region. They couldn't live in relational unity as one church because

geographical distance precluded it; they were churches. With reference to

multisite churches, this seems to give a stronger biblical support to local­

62
ized multisites over those extended over whole states and regions.

59. Allison, Sojourners and Strangers, 3 1 1 - 1 2 . See Allison's update on the multisite movement in

Brad House & Gregg Allison, Multichurch: Exploring the Future of Multisite ( Grand Rapids:

Zondervan, 2 0 1 7 ) .

60. Ibid., 3 1 2 - 1 3 . For references to "the whole church;' see Romans 16:23 and 1 Corinthians 14:23.

61. This is the conclusion of Roger Gehring, House Church and Mission: The Importance of

Household Structures in Early Christianity (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2004). He thinks it is

"almost certain that a plurality of house churches existed in Rome'' and that "we can be certain

that a plurality of house churches existed alongside the whole local church in Corinth" (296).

62. For a fuller exposition of this argument, see John S. Hammett, "What Makes a Multi-Site Church

One Church?" in Marking the Church: Essays in Ecclesiology, eds. Greg Peters and Matt Jenson

(Eugene, OR: Pickwick, 2016), 3 - 1 6 .

360 CHAPTER 1 2

Allison also sees theological support for multisite churches from

63
"the church's missional characteristic and its unitY:' Multiple sites allow

a church to reach deeply into a local community. It doesn't take people

out of their "missional/relational networks" by asking them to leave their

neighborhood to go to church. Moreover, one of the hoped for results

of multisite churches is growth, and going multisite allows churches to

accommodate growth without incurring enormous debts from building

new buildings and without planting new churches that may lack mature
64
members and leaders. As to church unity, Allison thinks the "common­

alities" shared by multisite churches (such as "mission, vision, finances,

leadership") allows them to embody "biblical virtues" like cooperation

65
and interdependence in "concrete ways:'

I have good friends on both sides of this debate and see strengths

and weaknesses in the arguments for both sides. I don't think the lack of

assembling all its members in one place every week automatically invali­

dates multisite churches, though I wonder how any genuine congregation­

alism, especially church discipline, can take place if all the members never

assemble. But somehow the church in Jerusalem managed to act congre­

gationally, even to the point of having congregationally elected deacons,

yet did so as a church scattered across multiple house gatherings. I have

not found any arguments against multisite churches that have convinced

me that all forms of multisites are biblically or theologically invalid,

though some are much more defensible than others. For example, I think

it would be very difficult for any multisite church extended across multiple

states to practice the type of relational unity we see in Acts 2:44-45, and

I wonder if it is really good for people to have a campus pastor who does
66
not regularly preach the word to them. But I think multisite advocates

could say the difficulty of practicing relational unity is also true of many

large traditional churches, where most members do not really know most

63. Allison, Sojourners and Strangers, 314.

64. Allison also argues that "traditional church planting efforts are generally thirty percent more

costly than multisite growing;' and the multisite approach "generates more opportunities for

people to serve at the various sites:' Ibid., 3 1 5 , n. 50.

65. Ibid., 3 1 5 .

66. Thus I share some of the "misgivings" over some forms of multisite churches that Jonathan

Leeman lists, though I would not share all of the twenty-two he gives, and my misgivings over

multisite churches are probably not as deep as his. See Jonathan Leeman, "Twenty-two Problems

with Multi-Site Churches: at https://www.9marks.org/article/twenty-two-problems-with-multi­

site-churches, accessed 8/ 14/2017.

AGAINST THE GRAIN 361

of the other members, and they may have a point. My preference would

be for multisite churches to be consciously in the process of continually

evaluating when it would be proper to release a site to become an autono­

67
mous local church. I think that would be the wisest way to resolve all the

potential problems of multisites without necessarily giving up some of the

missional and unity advantages Allison cites, which I think could also be

achieved by a number of traditional autonomous local churches, commit­

ted to working together.

Going Back

Another response that overlaps with some of the other responses

is what I call "Going Back:' It represents, especially within Baptist life,

those who think churches may best respond to contemporary challenges

by going back to some principles and practices that characterized Baptist

churches in the past.

Chief among those advocating for such practices have been those

associated with an organization called 9Marks. Taking its name from

68
Mark Dever's book, Nine Marks of a Healthy Church, 9Marks is a multi­

faceted ministry, but with a central focus on ecclesiology. Its website

describes it as follows:

At 9Marks, we write books, articles, and book reviews. We host conferences,

record interviews, and consult with church leaders. In short, we do every­

thing we can to help pastors, future pastors, and church members see what

69
a biblical church looks like, and to take practical steps for becoming one.

It was begun in 1998 as the Center for Church Reform. Mark Dever,

who has served as Pastor of Capitol Hill Baptist Church since 1994, has been

President of 9Marks since its founding. Dever was its sole public voice in the

67. There is a talk of a trend among some multi-site churches of doing exactly that, releasing campuses

to become local autonomous churches. The Dallas-area Village Church transitioned one campus

in 2 0 1 5 , and plans to do the same with the remaining five campuses by 2022. Multisite churches

in Nashville and Kansas City are following a similar strategy. See David Roach, "Multisite: TX

church's decision sparks talk of trends;' 1, http://www.bpnews.net/49679/multisite-tx-churchs­

decision-sparkstalk-of-trends, accessed 10/ 10/2017.

68. Now in its third edition, Nine Marks of a Healthy Church (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2013) has sold

more than 100,000 copies in English and has been translated into twelve languages, with three

more in process.

69. "What Does 9Marks Do?" at https://www.9marks.org/about/what-does-9marks-do/, accessed

8/14/2017.
362 CHAPTER 1 2

early years, but in the last decade there have been a growing number of writ­

ers contributing books published with the IX Marks logo on them:" Thabiti

Anyabwile, What Is a Healthy Church Member?; Jeramie Rinne, Church

Elders: How to Shepherd God's People Like Jesus; Bobby Jamieson, Going

Public: Why Baptism Is Required for Church Membership; and especially

Jonathan Leeman, who has written or edited eleven books, including multi­

ple books on church membership ( The Church and the Surprising Offense

of God's Love; Church Membership: How the World Knows Who Represents

Jesus; and Don't Fire Your Church Members), and now serves as editorial

director of 9Marks. They sell a total of sixty-one different books in twenty­

four languages through their online bookstore, with some titles selling more

than 100,000 copies." Last year, eight thousand people attended their confer­

ences, and tens of thousands receive the 9Marks Journal, which is published

quarterly online, though hard copies of many issues are also available."

Dever's nine marks go beyond strictly ecclesiological issues. In fact,

the first five marks ( expositional preaching, biblical theology, the gospel,

a biblical understanding of conversion and a biblical understanding of

evangelism) are arguably essential to a healthy church, but are not typically

addressed under the rubric of ecclesiology ( though perhaps they should be).

But it is in marks six, seven, and nine ( a biblical understanding of church

membership, biblical church discipline, and biblical church leadership)

that we deal with central ecclesiological issues. And while Dever uses the

adjective "biblical:' these marks are also historically Baptist. In fact, the very

first book published by the then Center for Church Reform is one edited
73
by Mark Dever, and with the simple title, Polity. The two subtitles explain

the book more fully: A Collection of Historic Baptist Documents, and Bibli­

cal Arguments on How to Conduct Church Life. The book consists largely of

ten reprints of "Historic Baptist Documents:' published between 1697 and

1874. Some of the major themes in those ten historic Baptist documents

70. Most of the books with the IX Marks logo are published by Crossway Books of Wheaton, Illinois,

though some are published by B & H o f Nashville. All have the IX Marks logo on the cover.

71. A trilogy of books by Greg Gilbert ( What Is the Gospel?; Who Is Jesus?; and Why Trust the Bible?)

are among their best sellers, with nearly 300,000 copies of the first sold alone, and translations of

it in Arabic, Chinese, and Russian. Sales through their online bookstore totaled $350,000 in the

past twelve months.

72. Much of the information in the previous paragraph was supplied in response to questions from

the author by the helpful staff at 9Marks. My thanks to Jonathan Leeman, Alex Duke, Daniel

Gardner, and Mary Beth Freeman.

73. Mark Dever, ed., Polity: Biblical Arguments on How to Conduct Church Life (Washington, DC:

Center for Church Reform, 2001).

AGAINST THE GRAIN 363

are requirements for church membership, guidance on how, when, why and

for what church discipline should be administered, and what type of struc­

74
ture and function church leadership should take. On these issues, Dever is

arguing that we can build healthy churches today by going back and recov­

ering understandings and practices of earlier Baptists, though the earlier

Baptists (and those at 9Marks) would insist that the ultimate source of these

understandings and practices is Scripture.

Others have noted the importance of recapturing these historic

practices as well. Of membership, Thom Rainer says, «Until we get our

churches back to the committed membership the Apostle Paul mandates

in 1 Corinthians 1 2 , we will continue to see declining attendance. But

when membership becomes truly meaningful, our churches will become

75
an unstoppable force for the Kingdom and glory of God:, In terms of

practical ways to go back to the type of meaningful membership found in

1 Corinthians 1 2 (and the rest of the New Testament), churches today will

76
find considerable help in historic Baptist understandings and practices.

Rick Warren couples meaningful membership practices (such as requir­

ing the signing of a church covenant) with the practice of church discipline:

"Saddleback practices church discipline-something rarely heard of today.

If you do not fulfill the membership covenant, you are dropped from our

membership. We remove hundreds of names from our roll every year?"

Warren is right in saying that church discipline is rarely heard of today. But

pastors can find extensive discussion and reflection on almost every imagin­

able aspect of church discipline by going back into historic Baptist thinking.

As to church leadership, there has been considerable buzz in contem­

porary conversations about calling Baptist church leaders "elders" and

having a plurality of elders in a local church. Since writing Elders in Congre-

74. Of the ten documents, all comment extensively on church discipline (though often under the

rubric of "church censure"), nine of the ten include discussions concerning church leadership

(several extensively), and eight have significant material on the duties of church members; all

include implicit teaching on church membership in their teaching on church discipline and

church government. It is fair to say that church membership, discipline, and leadership are

central themes of these ten documents, and of historic Baptist ecclesiology as a whole.

75. Thom Rainer, "#1 Reason for the Decline in Church Attendance;' 3, http://thomrainer.

com/2013/08/the- number-one- reason -for- the-decline- in -ch urch-attendance-and-fiveways- to­

address- it/, accessed 07 I 17/2017.

76. For more specifics on these historic Baptist understandings and practices, see chapter 4 of this

book on "Regenerate Church Membership;' which I think may accurately be called "The Baptist

Mark of the Church:'

77. Rick Warren, The Purpose-Driven Church (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995), 54.
364 CHAPTER 1 2

8
gational Life,7 Phil Newton testifies that he and Matt Schmucker "have

fielded countless phone calls, emails, and visits" from pastors concerning

the topic of elders and plurality. He states: "Three primary elements moved

me into the direction of a plurality of elders: Scripture, Baptist history, and

practical issues of church life?"

In these and other areas, pastors and church leaders are finding that in

the changed landscape of today's culture, many of the methods and prac­

tices of twentieth century Baptists are no longer effective. Even if effec­

tive by numerical standards, it may be questioned if they were ever bibli­

cal and effective in building churches with long-term health. But in any

case, many are finding help for today's changed landscape in going back to

practices that characterized and sustained Baptists in earlier years, when,

like today, they were a minority.

Revitalizing

A final response specifically addresses the reality of decline that is part

of the changed landscape churches face today. Such decline is reflected

in the fact that somewhere between eight thousand and ten thousand

churches in the US close their doors every year." Among those that are

surviving, multiple studies show that even among evangelical churches, 70

81
to 80 percent are plateaued or declining. And while numerical growth is

not the only indicator of church health, it is clear to many observers that

many formerly stalwart and healthy churches are in the process of dying.

One response has been and continues to be the planting of new

churches. That continues to be an important response, especially in the

growing urban centers of our nation. But alongside the planting of new

churches, there is a new and growing concern to not simply let dying

churches die, but to revitalize them, and there is a small but growing body
82
of literature to guide those attempting such efforts.

78. Phil A. Newton, Elders in Congregational Life (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2005).

79. Phil A. Newton and Matt Schmucker, Elders in the Life of the Church: Rediscovering the Biblical

Model for Church Leadership (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2014), 19.

80. These are the numbers from Thom Rainer, "13 Issues for Churches in 2013;' http://www.

churchleaders.com/pastors/pastor-articles/ 164 787-thom-rainer-13-issues-churches-2013.html,

accessed 9/04/2017.

81. Jeff Christopherson, "Foreword;' in Mark Clifton, Reclaiming Glory: Revitalizing Dying Churches

(Nashville: B & H, 2 0 1 6 ) , xv.

82. See Mark Clifton, Reclaiming Glory; Andrew M. Davis, Revitalize: Biblical Keys to Helping

Your Church Come Alive Again (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2 0 1 7 ) ; Brian Croft, Biblical Church

Revitalization: Solutions for Dying and Divided Churches (Christian Focus: Fearns, Scotland,
AGAINST THE GRAIN 365

There is considerable overlap with the responses given earlier in this

chapter. For example, one reason many churches are dying is that they no

longer speak the language of their community. In many cases, the demo­

graphics of the neighborhood surrounding the church has changed and

no longer matches the demographics of the remaining church members.

As well, many of the remaining members may have moved and no longer

live in the church's neighborhood. To revitalize, the church will need to do

some hard work in the area of contextualization. They must come to know

the members of their community, to understand their hurts and needs and

thus be able to speak the gospel meaningfully into their lives. Mark Clifton
83
describes this process as exegeting the community. Andrew Davis applies

it specifically to the matter of worship style: "the church that refuses to

stay connected with surrounding culture musically will usually cease to be

appealing to younger believers and will tend to age upward:' He calls on

churches to "make clear distinctions between what is timeless in church

life . . . and what is temporary'?" This is the work of contextualization.

Another aspect of revitalizing involves the response of becom­

ing missional. Not only must revitalizing churches come to know their

communities, they must actively serve them. In the past, such churches

may have grown and been healthy simply by being there and offering

programs for people; because people came. But in today's context, the

church will not be revitalized by relying on attractional methods. Rather

than focusing on how to get people into the church building, Clifton urges

churches to focus on getting church members "into the lives of the people

in the community on a consistent basis:' To make it clear, he says, "You

don't redefine your church for your community by changing your name,

updating your sanctuary, or changing your music. You redefine the church

for your community by how you serve if' Clifton's experience has been

that as the church has done so, "people have taken notice?"

Another part of revitalization relates to the major response just previ­

ously discussed, that of going back to earlier practices, especially in matters

of leadership structure and membership. Brian Croft notes that in revitaliz-

2 0 1 6 ) ; Thom Rainer, Autopsy of a Diseased Church: 12 Ways to Keep Yours Alive (Nashville:

B & H, 2014). Clifton uses the language ofreplanting as a synonym for revitalizing; some see

a distinction between replanting and revitalizing, but as both are responses to the reality of

dying churches, both will be included in this discussion.

83. Clifton, Reclaiming the Glory, 63-66.

84. Davis, Revitalize, 26.

85. Clifton, Reclaiming Glory, 65.

366 CHAPTER 1 2

ing projects, matters ofleadership structure often are among the last matters

86
to be addressed, yet can be crucial to the church's growth and health. Davis

urges a return to the practice of a plurality of elders, as "immeasurably help­

87
ful and a major step in the right direction, in revitalization. In terms of

membership, Croft again echoes practices from the past in noting the impor­

tance of maintaining healthy membership. In relationship to the practice of

congregational government, when membership is healthy, "congregational­

ism is beautiful and life-giving, but a 'train wreck, when it goes wrong.?"

But many of the "lessons" Andrew Davis passes on, or the "impera­

tives" Mark Clifton underscores, are simply matters commanded in Scrip­

ture: "pray without ceasing": love the people; preach the Word; make disci­

ples." Moreover, in keeping with 1 Timothy 3 : 1 - 7 and Titus 1 : 5 - 9 , Davis

emphasizes the importance of character in pastors who would undertake

church revitalization. Such a pastor must be holy, relying on God and not

himself, be humble and yet courageous, patient and discerning. He must

expect and overcome discouragement and spiritual attack."

Despite these difficulties, there are success stories in church revitaliza­

tion. Davis and Clifton both recount those they have been involved in, and

91
Ed Stetzer and Mike Dodson give a much larger sample. Yet the overall

message of this chapter may be somewhat discouraging. With the changed

landscape making the progress of the gospel more difficult, and with the

reality of changed sexual morality and religious decline defining our era,

churches in North America face undeniable challenges. By contrast, when

we tum to the prospect for churches around the world, we encounter a

much brighter and positive story. To that story we tum in the final chapter.

86. Croft, as reported in Andrew Smith, "Endure Trials in Church Revitalization, Pastors Say:' 2,

http://www.baptistpress.com/ 49391/ endure- trials- in-church- revitalization-pastors-say, accessed

8/22/2017.

87. Davis, Revitalization, 26.

88. Croft, as reported in Smith, "Endure Trials:' 2.

89. Davis and Clifton both highlight the importance of prayer and making disciples; Clifton

includes a specific emphasis on loving the remaining members of the dying church, and

Davis strongly emphasizes the importance of preaching the Word. For the full list of Davis's

"fourteen lessons:' see Davis, Revitalization, 22-27; for Clifton's "six replanting imperatives:'

see Clifton, Reclaiming Glory, 53-76.

90. Davis, Revitalize, 23-25. As Clifton said to a prospective church replanter, "You can expect

significant spiritual attack and deep, dark depression'' (Clifton, Reclaiming Glory, 144).

91. Ed Stetzer and Mike Dodson, Comeback Churches: How 300 Churches Turned Around and Yours

Can Too (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2007).

 C H A P T E R 1 3

INTO ALL THE WORLD

The Future of the Global Church

WHILE THIS BOOK IS PRIMARILY addressed to churches in North Amer­

ica, the question attended to in this part of the book ("Where is the

church going!") cannot be answered without broadening the focus to

include a global view. As technology shrinks the world and we become

more and more a global village, important trends and developments

in the church around the world have the potential to affect churches

in America. Moreover, since all Christians share in the one universal

body of Christ and thus in the communion of saints, it is only right

that they care about the health and welfare of the larger body. Further,

since all Christians also share in the mandate to make disciples of all

nations (Matt. 2 8 : 1 9 - 2 0 ) , it is appropriate that they evaluate their prog­

ress in terms of their corporate obedience to that mandate. Finally, since

the church has received Christ's promise that he will build his church,

despite all the opposition of the forces of evil (Matt. 1 6 : 1 8 ) , it is edify­

ing to survey the progress of the church around the world and marvel at

what Christ has built.

367
368 CHAPTER 13

THE AMAZING STORY

Although little recognized by secular historians, the progress of the

church around the world, especially in the past two-and-a-half centuries,

is an amazing story. Andrew Walls compares how a visitor from Mars

would have seen Christianity in 1 7 8 9 and then two hundred years later. In

1 7 8 9 , «he might well have assumed Christianity to be the tribal religion of

the white peoples:' while two centuries later «he would find Christianity a

world religion . . . firmly established in every continent, among people of

the most diverse and disparate origins and cultures:' and «receding only

among the Caucasians-to whom 200 years before it seemed confined."

Justo Gonzalez states categorically, «there is little doubt that, from the

point of view of the history of Christianity, the most important event of

the nineteenth century was the founding of a truly universal church, in

which peoples of all races and nations had a part." Philip Jenkins chides

fellow historians who ignore the importance of the religious changes

that have taken place in the past century, calling such neglect «comically

myopic, on a par with a review of the eighteenth century that managed to

miss the French Revolution."

One person who has recognized and sought to document the wide­

ranging impact of the missionary movement has been Robert Wood­

berry, himself the son of missionary, professor, and Islamic scholar J.

Dudley Woodberry. From fourteen years of research as a social scien­

tist, Woodberry reported his findings in the journal American Politi­

cal Science Review, arguing that specifically "conversionary Protestant"

missionaries were a «crucial catalyst initiating the development and

spread of religious liberty, mass education, mass printing, newspa­

pers, voluntary organizations, and colonial reforms, thereby creating

the conditions that made stable democracy more likely"? In a follow up

report in Christianity Today, Woodberry added the impact of missionar­

ies on economic development, healthcare, infant mortality, and educa­

5
tion, especially of women.

1. A. F. Walls, "Outposts of Empire;' in Introduction to the History of Christianity, ed. Tim Dowley

(Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2002), 557.

2. Justo Gonzalez, The Story of Christianity (Peabody, MA: Prince Press, 2001), 2:303.

3. Jenkins, The Next Christendom, 1.

4. Robert Woodberry, "The Missionary Roots of Liberal Democracy;' American Political Science

Review 106, no. 2 (May 2 0 1 2 ) : 244-74.

5. Andrea Palpant Dilley, "The World the Missionaries Made;' Christianity Today (January­

February 2014): 34-41.

INTO ALL THE WORLD 369

This book is not a history of missions; that task has been more than
6
ably accomplished by others. But we cannot discern where the church is

going if we do not know from whence it has come, and thus a brief review

of history is in order.

While there were certainly many heroic missionaries involved in

the spread of Christianity across Europe in the first millennium of the

church's history, and others who took the gospel to the lands colonized by

European nations in the post- Reformation era, the modern missionary

movement is usually seen as beginning in the late eighteenth century and

exploding in the nineteenth century.

One who is often called the father of that movement is the Baptist

William Carey, whose 1792 work, "An Enquiry into the Obligations of

Christians, to use Means for the Conversion of the Heathens;' is a land­

7
mark in the history of missions. Carey argued, contrary to the interpre­

tation common since the Reformation, that Christ's command to make

disciples of all nations (Matt. 2 8 : 1 9 - 2 0 ) was not limited to the apostles,

but was binding on all Christians. Christians were thus obligated to use

"means" to obey Christ's command. The specific means Carey proposed

was the formation of a society composed of all those willing to support the

sending of missionaries to seek the conversion of the heathen. At Carey's

prompting, a small group of Baptists in England formed such a society

in 1792 and sent Carey to India as their first missionary. Almost imme­

diately, other denominations in England and North America followed

suit. In the nineteenth century, called the "great century" of missions by

the foremost historian of missions, Kenneth Scott Latourette, Christian­

ity became the first and only truly worldwide religion, as thousands of

missionaries fanned out into every continent. Many died, especially in

Central Africa, but when one fell, another would step forward. It is truly

an amazing story of courage and love, one that changed the face of the

world in ways far more profound than those accomplished by the more

well-known political leaders of the era.

6. The classic history of missions is the seven-volume work by Kenneth Scott Latourette, A History of

the Expansion of Christianity (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1937-1945). Neill, History of Christian

Missions, is a more succinct account. Ruth Tucker, From Jerusalem to Irian Jaya: A Biographical

History of Christian Missions ( Grand Rapids: Academie Books, 1983) is a fascinating approach

to the same topic, as she gives a history in the form of ninety-nine short biographies.

7. The full text of Carey's work, along with a biography of Carey's life, is found in Timothy George,

Faithful Witness: The Life and Mission of William Carey (Birmingham, AL: New Hope, 1 9 9 1 ) .
370 CHAPTER 13

The advance continued in the twentieth century, though interrupted by

two World Wars. Yet even that stimulated more progress, as some of those

who saw the world in the course of World War II came back to the United

States only to find that they could not stay home. They had seen firsthand

the needs of the world and felt compelled to respond. The post-World War

II era saw the emergence of a new wave of missionary activity, primarily

from evangelical North American churches, leading Ralph Winter to write

8
of this period as The Twenty-five Unbelievable Years, 1945 to 1969.

Winter is also largely responsible for reshaping how mission leaders

began to see the task of missions. He noted that the Great Commission

tells us to make disciples of all nations, or ethne. He called for Christians

not just to seek to reach every person with the gospel, but to focus their

efforts especially on reaching unreached peoples. Those who already had

Christians within their own ethno-linguistic grouping should be reached

by those Christians; missionaries should focus their attention on genuinely

unreached people groups, those who had no Christians in their ethnic

9
group or no Christian who spoke their language. Thus, a motto adopted

by some in the missions community was no longer just "The Gospel for

Every Person;' but also "A Church for Every People;' a motto that shows

the centrality of churches in the ongoing task of missions.

THE GLOBAL FUTURE OF THE CHURCH

This brief review of the history of missions leads us to our central

concern in this chapter. What lies ahead for the church globally?

The first statement we can make about the future of the church is

that it seems clear the church will continue to be planted globally, espe­

cially among unreached peoples. Indeed, church planting seems to be

the priority task for many missionaries. In that task, they are assisted

by a team of researchers called the Joshua Project. From sources around

the world, they compile a list of unreached and least-reached people

10
groups. The purpose of this list, which they provide free to the global

8. Ralph D. Winter, The Twenty-five Unbelievable Years, 1945 to 1969 (Pasadena, CA: William

Carey Library, 1970).

9. Winter's important address on this topic was initially given at the 1974 Lausanne Congress on

World Evangelization. See Ralph Winter, "The New Macedonia: A Revolutionary New Era in

Mission Begins;' in Perspectives on the World Christian Movement: A Reader, eds. Ralph Winter

and Steven Hawthorne (Pasadena, CA: William Carey Library, 1 9 8 1 ) , 2 9 3 - 3 1 1 .

10. Their criteria for "unreached" is less than 2% evangelical Christian and less than 5 percent professing

Christian within a people group. See https://joshuaproject.net/about/details, 2, accessed 9/11/2017.

INTO ALL THE WORLD 371

church, is "to provide a clear goal of pioneer church-planting among the

largest unreached p e o p l e s " ! ' As of 2 0 1 7 , their list includes 1 6 , 8 6 2 people

groups in the world. They identify 6,996 peoples (41.5% of peoples;

42.2% of population) as "unreached;' with other groups described as

"significantly reached;' ( 1 9 . 4 % ) , "partially reached;' ( 2 2 . 5 % ) , "superfi­

cially reached;' ( 1 0 . 1 % ) , and "minimally reached" ( 6 . 5 % ) . 1 2 The impor­

tance of churches as the agent of missions, and planting churches

among unreached peoples as one of the goals of missions, is seen in the

mission statement of the International Mission Board of the Southern

Baptist Convention: "IMB partners with churches to empower limitless

missionary teams who are evangelizing, discipling, planting and multi­

plying healthy churches, and training leaders among unreached peoples

13
and places for the glory of God:'

This emphasis on church planting reflects the New Testament teach­

ing that God's Spirit works through the church to accomplish his merciful

purposes on the earth. Howard Snyder says that the church is uniquely

empowered to be "God's healing force throughout the earth;' and thus,

"church planting is the number one priority of gospel globallzation.t"

However, Snyder also adds, "it is not enough merely to plant churches. It

makes all the difference in the world-all the difference for the kingdom­

what kind of church is planted?" The kind of churches likely to be planted

globally in the next generation seem likely to be influenced by three major

global trends, all likely to have ecclesiological impact.

The Growth of Pentecostal/ Charismatic Churches

The first trend that began in the past but will continue in the future

is the incredible vitality of the Pentecostal/ charismatic branch of Chris­

tianity. Pentecostalism is usually seen as originating out of the holi­

ness churches of the late nineteenth century. Holiness churches saw the

11. Ibid.

12. See https://joshuaproject.net/people_groups/statistics, l, accessed 9 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 7 . However, out of

all these thousands of unreached people groups, researcher Jason Mandryk says only about 650

have "significant population" that are both unreached and unengaged by missionary activity.

He sees this as "incredible progress globally!" See "State of the World 2 0 1 6 : A Younger Leaders

Gathering Presentation by Operation World:' https://www.lausanne.org/content/state-world­

jason-mandryk-molly-wall-ylg2016, accessed 9/13/2017.

13. See "About the IMB:' https://www.imb.org/vision-and-mission, 2, accessed 9/11/2017.

14. Howard Snyder with Daniel V. Runyon, Decoding the Church: Mapping the DNA of Christ's Body

(Grand Rapids: Baker, 2002), 1 6 1 .

15. Ibid.
372 CHAPTER 13

baptism of the Spirit as a second work of grace, subsequent to salvation,

and essential to a deeper Christian life. Pentecostalism was distinguished

from the holiness churches by its stress on speaking in tongues as the

normative manifestation of one's reception of the baptism of the Spirit.

Thus, all Christians were to experience something like what happened on

the day of Pentecost recorded in Acts 2. The movement's origin is associ­

ated with tongue-speaking among the students of Charles Fox Parham at

the Topeka Bible College in January 1 9 0 1 , but was popularized by the 1906
16
Azusa Street Revival in Los Angeles.

A related but separate form of the movement began in a different

context among a different audience in 1 9 6 0 , when Dennis Bennett, an

Episcopalian rector in California, shared with his congregation the news

that he had been experiencing the Holy Spirit in a new way in his life. This

movement quickly spread across the United States and beyond. It has at

times been called neo- Pentecostalism but more often the charismatic

movement. It differed from the Pentecostal movement in that it found its

adherents among the members of established mainline churches and did

not issue in new charismatic denominations. Rather, these charismatics

sought to renew their own churches and denominations, though that

pattern seems to be changing, as more and more independent charis­

matic churches are being born. In common with the Pentecostals, they

have emphasized the ministry of the Holy Spirit, including the baptism

and gifts of the Spirit.

Along with classical Pentecostals and charismatics within other

denominations, there is a third, even larger and more recent group

within this movement called neo-charismatics or neo-pentecostals.

Sometimes called the "third wave" of the Pentecostal movement, neo­

charismatics are something of a catch-all category, including African

Indigenous Churches (AIC), large house church networks in China

and Latin America, and a total of 1 8 , 8 1 0 independent, neo-charismatic

denominations and networks. Altogether, the number of neo-charis­

matic believers worldwide is estimated at 295 million. By comparison,

there are 7 40 Pentecostal denominations with 65 million adherents, and

6,530 "non-pentecostal, mainline denominations with large, organized

16. For more on the origins and historical development of Pentecostalism, see Walter J. Hollenweger,

Pentecostalism: Origins and Developments Worldwide (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1998).

INTO ALL THE WORLD 373

17
Charismatic movements:' totalling around 1 7 5 million members. So of

the more than half-billion persons in this movement, more than half are
18
from the neo-charismatic or neo-pentecostal churches.

In terms of ecclesiology, there is little written about this area of

Pentecostal doctrine. Indeed, with the numbers of charismatics in a

huge variety of denominations, and the variegated nature of the neo­

charismatics, it may be hard to say anything that is true ecclesiologically

of all within this movement. As Veli-Matti Karkkainen has observed,

"Pentecostal ecclesiology has an ad hoc character; it is often practi­

cal rather than systematic in nature. Pentecostals exhibit all forms of

church structure, from congregational to episcopal,"!" Most discussion

has focused on their distinctive doctrines concerning the Holy Spirit.

Yet their emphasis on the Spirit seems to be shaping their ecclesiology

as it develops. One of the earliest formulations of a Pentecostal view of

the church describes the church as a fellowship involving a common

experience of the Spirit and mutual edification. Without excluding the

importance of preaching or the sacraments, they emphasize the impor­

tance of the mutual ministry of members of the church, as instruments

of the Spirit, employing the charismata (spiritual gifts) given by the

Spirit in service to the members of the body. One summary describes

the essence of Pentecostal ecclesiology in these words: "The dynamic

of the fellowship is concretely lived out through the charismata?" In

general, charismatic ecclesiology agrees with the Pentecostal empha­

sis on fellowship, but, in keeping with their origin within established

denominations, they seek to link their experience of the Spirit with

the faith handed down in their churches, and see the Spirit working
21
through tradition and sacrament.

17. These numbers and descriptions are taken from Stanley M. Burgess, ed., The New International

Dictionary of Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements, rev. and expanded ed. ( Grand Rapids:

Zondervan, 2002), xvii-xx, 284-85. Burgess states that his statistics are based on the 2001 edition

of the World Christian Encyclopedia, edited by David Barrett, et al.

18. Ibid., 284-85. These numbers are from a 2002 source, and are at best an approximation. The

movement is estimated to grow by another 9 million every year.

19. Veli-Matti Karkkainen, "Ecclesiology;' in Global Dictionary of Theology, eds. William Dyrness

and Veli-Matti Karkkainen (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic/Nottingham, UK: Inter-Varsity,

2008), 256.

20. Karkkainen, Introduction to Ecclesiology, 75. Karkkainen draws upon an unpublished paper by

Peter Kuzmic and Miroslav Volf, "Communio Sanctorum: Toward a Theology of the Church as a

Fellowship of Persons" (Riano, Italy: International Roman Catholic-Pentecostal Dialogue, 1985).

21. Ibid., 76-77.

374 CHAPTER 13

Several of the emphases of Pentecostal ecclesiology seem well

founded in Scripture. Baptists agree with Pentecostals in seeing the New

Testament as portraying the importance of participation by the whole

assembly in the life of the church and a belief in the importance of the

local church. In recent years, their emphasis on the importance on the

charismata for equipping believers has been adopted by many Baptists

and most evangelicals, though there are still differences on the so-called
22
miraculous gifts. Beyond these emphases, the greatest contribution of

the Pentecostal-charismatic movement ecclesiologically speaking may

be "the pervasive influence of their spirituality and theology on the

rest of the Christian churches in terms of worship and liturgy, ministry

23
patterns and so on:,

The Growth of Southern Hemisphere Churches

The second major trend affecting the global future of the church is the

ongoing movement of the weight of the church from the Northern to the

Southern Hemisphere. This shift is the theme of Philip Jenkins's important

work, The Next Christendom: The Coming of Global Christianity. He notes

that while some in the West have seen the growth of secularization as

indicating that Christianity is on its death bed, the story is quite different

outside of Europe and the Northern Hemisphere. He says, "Over the past

century, however, the center of gravity in the Christian world has shifted

inexorably southward, to Africa, Asia, and Latin America:' Moreover, he

adds, "This trend will continue apace in coming years . . . . Christianity

should enjoy a worldwide boom in the new century, but the vast majority

of believers will be neither white nor European, nor Euro-American,"?"

To attach some specific numbers to this shift, consider the following. "In

1960, 29% of all evangelical Christians were from Africa, Asia, or Latin

America. Today it is around 78%, and by 2020, this figure is expected to

be 80%. This shift is observable across all major Christian traditions and

blocs, not just evangelicals':"

22. For a fuller listing of their emphases, see the list of seven "salient features" of Pentecostal

ecclesiology by Michael Harper, "The Holy Spirit Acts in the Church, Its Structures, Its

Sacramentality, Its Worship and Sacraments:' One in Christ 12 (1976): 323, as cited in

Karkkainen, Introduction to Ecclesiology, 77- 78, n. 44. For the differing views on the miraculous

gifts, see Wayne Grudem, ed., Are Miraculous Gifts for Today? ( Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1999).

23. Karkkainen, "Ecclesiology;' 259-60.

24. Jenkins, The Next Christendom, 2.

25. "State of the World 2016:'

INTO ALL THE WORLD 375

Jenkins notes that some important differences between the newer

and older churches are already becoming apparent. For example, it is

clear that the newer churches, even those that are associated with older,

traditional denominations, are overwhelmingly conservative in their

moral and theological orientation. In the 1998 Lambeth Conference

of the world's Anglican bishops, a liberal statement concerning homo­

26
sexuality was defeated, due to the votes of Asian and African bishops.

Even more recently, the decision of American Episcopalians to ordain

a practicing homosexual as a bishop has threatened to rend the world­

wide Anglican communion, as Anglican bishops in Africa have consid­

ered withdrawing. If they do so, it will have enormous consequences,

for of the 70 million Anglicans worldwide, more than twenty million

live in Nigeria alone. By 2050, while there may be 1 5 0 million Anglicans

worldwide, "only a tiny minority will be White Europeans":" If Southern

Hemisphere Christians are able to exercise influence in keeping with

their numbers, the positions of several mainline denominations may

change radically, for the leading churches in Africa are Catholic, Angli­
28
can, Methodist, and other traditional denominations.

The ecclesiological impact of this shift to the Global South may also

be seen as churches from the Global South "increasingly provide leader­

ship to-and set the agenda for-the global Christian family"?" As Jason

Mandryk observes, "The Pope is Argentinian, the head of the WEA is a

Filipino, the head of IFES is from Chad, of OMF from Hong Kong, of SIM

from Nigeria, ofinterserve from India, of the Navigators from Kenya, and

of OFM from Singapore'?" Moreover, some of the most important new

forms that the church is taking are seen most prominently in the Global

South. Karkkainen sees the base ecclesial communities of South Amer­

ica, the "highly contextual, somewhat syncretistic" churches exploding in

Africa (the AIC, African Indigenous or African Initiated Churches), and

the house church movement in China as among the "new ways of being

26. Jenkins, The Next Christendom, 7, 1 2 1 .

27. Ibid., 59.

28. Ibid., 57-58. Despite all the attention given to the growth of Pentecostal and independent

churches, Jenkins notes the continuing presence in even greater number of Roman Catholics in

Africa, Latin America, and parts of Asia.

29. Ibid.

30. Ibid. The acronyms are of prominent evangelical organizations and missions agencies that would

have been headed by those from the United States or England in the past.
376 CHAPTER 13

31
the church" that we are seeing in the contemporary global context; all are

from the Global South.

Theological Education for Global Churches

These first two major trends-the explosive growth of the Pentecos­

tal and charismatic movement, and the shift of Christianity to the Global

South-present great opportunities for the global church but also a great

challenge. One of the perennial needs of these multiplying churches is a

sufficient number of well-trained leaders to guide these new churches in

the years to come. This leads to a third major global trend: advances in

global theological education. The problem is that traditional approaches

to theological education have been heavily Western and "heavily Enlight­

enment-laden:' As a result, such theological education has posed ques­

tions and given answers irrelevant to the context of Global South

churches, and has failed to address the "biblically urgent questions" with
32
which these churches are confronted. Not just the content, but the whole

approach to theological education in the West is seen as in need of radical

change: "theological education that is not animated by and oriented to the

missional nature of the church endangers the church.l"

The failure of traditional Western models of theological education to

meet the needs of Global South churches has sparked considerable discus­

sion. There is a growing recognition among evangelical theology in the

Global North that we need the help of theologians from the Global South

to help us "address our Western blind spots in biblical interpretation and

theological formulation'?" This is seen in books like Misreading Scripture

with Western Eyes: Removing Cultural Blinders to Better Understand the

Bible and Theology in the Context of World Christianity, with the latter

described as, "how the global church is influencing the way we think

about and discuss theology?"

31. Karkkainen, "Ecclesiology;' 257-59.

32. Ralph E. Enlow, "Global Christianity and the Role of Theological Education: Wrapping Up and

Going Forward;' 2, http://icete-edu.org/pdf/C-06%20Enlow%20Global%20Christianity.pdf.,

accessed 9 / 1 5 / 2 0 1 7 .

33. Ibid., 6.

34. Jeffrey Freeman, "Learning and Teaching Global Theologies;' in Global Theology in Evangelical

Perspective: Exploring the Contextual Nature of Theology and Mission, eds. Jeffrey P. Greenman

and Gene L. Green (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2 0 1 2 ) , 245.

35. E. Randolph Richards and Brandon J. O'Brien, Misreading Scripture with Western Eyes: Removing

Cultural Blinders to Better Understand the Bible (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Books, 2012), and

Timothy Tennent, Theology in the Context of World Christianity ( Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2007).
INTO ALL THE WORLD 377

What are the implications of these shifts for the interest of this book,

ecclesiology? In terms of models for theological education, there are

proposals to more closely attach theological education to churches, as

opposed to institutions such as seminaries," and approaches to develop

theological education in accordance with the missional nature of the

37
church. These may lead to expanded understandings of the mission of

the church, in terms of the extent of its teaching ministry, and perhaps

new emphases on the roles of pastors, in terms of training new pastors,

and a new view of the type of education needed for pastors (more contex­

tual and practical, as opposed to theoretical).

Veli-Matti Karkkainen asks the question in terms of the content of

ecclesiology: "What are the defining theological issues in the doctrine of

the church in light of the globalizing . . . theological community?" He sees

the question of what makes the church church as one foundational debate.

Missional ecclesiology is another important approach to understanding

the church. He adds the themes of charismatic structure and the ministry

of the whole people of God as emphases in contemporary ecclesiology,

perhaps due, at least in part, to the influence of the Pentecostal-charis­

matic movement. Finally, he thinks there is "an emerging consensus" on

the "principle of equality and justice among church members.":" He may

be right here, but the sources he cites in developing these themes still

seem to me too Western. The full impact of the "Pentecostalization" of the

church and the shift of weight to the Global South on theological educa­
39
tion and ecclesiology may still remain to be seen.

QUESTIONS RAISED BY THE

CHURCH IN OTHER CULTURES

For most of its history, the church has enjoyed a relatively homoge­

neous cultural background. Initially, that background was Greco- Roman,

36. Of course, moving theological education out of seminaries has been going on for decades, as

Theological Education by Extension (TEE) has become increasingly popular. But the new model is

more intentionally church-based (see Jeff Reed, "Church-Based Theological Education: Creating a

New Paradigm;' http://www.bild.org/philosophy/ParadigmPapers.html, accessed 9/15/2017).

37. Robert Banks, Reenvisioning Theological Education: Exploring a Missional Alternative to Current

Models (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999).

38. Karkkainen, "Ecclesiology;' 260-61.

39. Technology is having a profound impact on the delivery of theological education in North

America, with online classes and distance education increasing rapidly. One suspects it will not

be long before it will similarly impact global theological education, but it is not recognized as a

major trend in discussions of global theological education as of now.

378 CHAPTER 13

which was the foundation for much of Western or European culture. But

the movement of the church into all the world has brought the church into

a variety of new cultures, raising a number of important questions. This

section examines the questions raised by the presence and planting of the

church in other cultures.

The need for a proper adaptation to culture has always been a chal­

lenge to missionaries planting the church in other cultures. Churches

in some contexts met in buildings and sang songs that were alien to the

culture. As a result, Christianity was rejected in some cases as a foreign,

Western religion.

In addition, the Bible itself was written within a culture that is not

always easily transferable to another culture. This involves a variety of

challenges. For example, the New Testament requirements for an elder

include that he be the husband of but one wife and a good manager of his

household ( 1 Tim. 3:2, 4 - 5 ) . But in some cultures, those two requirements

seem contradictory. For the Higi of Nigeria or the Kru of Liberia, a man

could be judged an effective manager of his household only if that house­

hold included at least two wives. According to Charles Kraft, the Kru say,

"You cannot trust a man with only one wife.?"

Churches in Islamic contexts have struggled with how far a believer

in Christ can retain his or her Muslim identity. Can he or she still attend

the mosque or say Muslim prayers? Or for churches originating in Muslim

cultures, is it acceptable to worship on Thursday evenings? Is there any

reason why women cannot sit on one side and men on the other side of a

room during a worship service? Can Christians adopt lying prostrate as a

41
normal posture for prayer?

All these are examples of contextualization. We mentioned it as one

of the responses churches in North America need to adopt to address

the changed cultural situation in which they minister, but it has always

been an issue for missionaries. Recently, with increasing interaction in

intensely Muslim and Hindu contexts, missionaries have raised the ques­

tion of how far one can go in contextualization without crossing a line into

40. Charles H. Kraft, Christianity in Culture: A Study in Dynamic 1heologizing in Cross-Cultural

Perspective (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1979), 324-25.

41. Don Newman, "Keys to Unlocking Muslim Strongholds:' in Winter and Hawthorne, eds.,

Perspectives on the World Christian Movement, D - 1 5 2 . Newman advocates the formation of

"messianic mosques:' in which "followers of Jesus do not leave their culture but continue to

appear as Muslims while worshipping Jesus:' For more suggestions, see Phil Parshall, Beyond the

Mosque (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1985).

INTO ALL THE WORLD 379

syncretism. A standard reference point for discussing contextualization,

initially developed for contextualization in a Muslim context, but useful

42
for other contexts as well, is the C - 1 to C-6 spectrum. The C h e r e stands

for «Christ-centered communities" ( which is another way to describe a

church) and the numbers indicate the degree of contextualization. C - 1 is

a traditional church using a language other than that used by the target

population. C-2 goes a bit further. It uses a national language but is in all

43
other respects a traditional (Western) church. C - 3 is used for churches

«using insider language and religiously neutral cultural forms?" C-4 is

very similar, except that «cultural and religious forms are adopted as long

as they are not explicitly forbidden in Scripture.?" C - 5 has aroused the

most controversy. This refers to followers of Jesus who reject features of

Muslim theology that contradict the Bible, but remain «fully embedded

in the Islamic community?" C - 6 is seen as a level of contextualization

in contexts where confession of faith in Christ would probably lead to

imprisonment or martyrdom. Believers in these contexts form secret

underground groups.

Most missionaries, especially in Islamic contexts, practice contextu­

alization through C-4 with little controversy. However, C-5 has seemed

excessive to many, as it leaves Muslim background believers remaining

within their Muslim context. Thus, this is called the insider controversy,

as Muslim converts remain inside their Muslim culture ( though not their

Muslim religion)." Timothy Tennent evaluates the arguments from both

sides of this controversy. He cites Phil Parshalls research of leaders among

C-5 Muslim background believers, which found that almost all (97%) affirm

«Jesus is the only Savior, but that a majority (66%) still place the Qur'an

above the Law, Prophets and the Gospel (Old and New Testament) and 45%

do not affirm the Trinity. Parshall questions whether Muslim believers can

42. John Travis, "The Cl to C6 Spectrum;' Evangelical Missions Quarterly 34, no. 4 ( 1 9 9 8 ) : 407-08.

John Travis is a pseudonym.

43. In his 1998 article, Travis argued that the majority of churches in the Islamic world are either C - 1

or C-2 (Travis, "The C l to C6 Spectrum;' 407). I suspect that there may have been some change

in that number since 1998, but have no hard evidence.

44. I am using the descriptions of these categories from the work of Timothy Tennent, Theology in

the Context of World Christianity, 196-97.

45. Ibid., 196.

46. Ibid., 197.

47. For a thorough evaluation of the Insider Movement, see Doug Coleman, "A Theological Analysis

of the Insider Movement Paradigm from Four Perspectives: Theology of Religions, Revelation,

Soteriology, and Ecclesiology" (Ph.D. diss., Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, 2 0 1 1 ) .

380 CHAPTER 13

flourish as the church of Jesus Christ while retaining their Muslim identi­

ty." But Tennent also recognizes the claims of Joshua Massey, who argues

that we should celebrate the personal faith experience of these believers,

rather than imposing what Massey calls "Greco- Roman Gentile categories

of orthodoxy?" Tennent carefully examines the claims from those on both

sides of this controversy, but concludes that one of the problems of those

supporting the insider movement is an inadequate ecclesiology, one that

keeps "the doctrines of soteriology and ecclesiology at arms length:' In the

end, "To encourage Muslim believers to retain their self-identity as Muslims

reveals a view of the church that is clearly sub-Christian'?"

Thus, the presence of the church in other cultures raises numer­

ous questions of ecclesiology and calls for renewed study of the issues

considered in part 1 of this book- those relating to the nature, marks,

and essence of the church. Missiologist Darrell Guder states, "It is widely

acknowledged that the planting of new churches in previously unevange­

lized cultures was undertaken with a very inadequate ecclesiology?" This

inadequacy in the area of ecclesiology remains today. In a recent inter­

view, mission leader C. Douglas McConnell was asked to name the great­

est challenge facing the global evangelical missions movement today. He

responded, "There is a critical need for frontier mission types to develop

an ecclesiology. We are church planters but in some cases we do not under­

stand what a church is either theologically and even to a lesser extent in

practice."? The complexity of questions surrounding contextualization

argues strongly for providing missionaries with the theological training

that will give them the tools to analyze the issues adequately and develop

a contextual, but biblical, ecclesiology.

48. Tennent is reporting the research in Phil Parshall, "Danger! New Directions in Contextualization;'

Evangelical Missions Quarterly, 34, no. 4 (October 1998): 404-10.

49. Joshua Massey, "Misunderstanding C-5: His Ways are Not Our Orthodoxy;' Evangelical Missions

Quarterly, 40, no. 3 (July 2004): 296-304. Tennent notes with some concern that in his article,

Massey "distances himself from historic Christian views of Christology;' favoring an Arian

Christo logy rather than Chalcedonian, and denying the eternal preexistence of Christ (Tennent,

Theology in the Context of World Christianity, 2 1 1 , n. 5 1 ) .

50. Tennent, Theology in the Context of World Christianity, 2 1 5 . Tennent further notes the "inherent

contradiction in the fact that all of the 'Cs' in the C - 1 to C-6 scale stand for 'Christ-centered

community; and yet as long as the believer retains one's self-identity as a Muslim, he or she

remain in an Allah-centered community" (Ibid., n. 62).

51. Darrell L. Guder, "The Church as Missional Community;' in The Community of the Word:

Toward an Evangelical Ecclesiology, eds. Mark Husbands and Daniel J. Treier (Downers Grove,

IL: InterVarsity/Leicester, UK: Apollos, 2005), 123.

52. "Looking Back . . . Looking Forward;' Mission Frontiers 22, no. 3 (January 2000): 9 - 1 0 .
INTO ALL THE WORLD 381

But there is one final, more positive, hopeful and even eschatologi­

cal question raised by the presence of the church in other cultures. It

arises from Christ's statement in Matthew 24: 1 4 : «And this gospel of

the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all

nations, and then the end will come:' As the church is planted around

the world, and the gospel is preached in more and more of the ethne, or

nations, the end seems to be drawing near. Could we be the generation

that sees the fulfillment of this promise? Second Peter 3 : 1 1 - 1 2 tells us

«to live holy and godly lives as you look forward to the day of God and

speed its coming:' It seems then that part of living a holy and godly life

is having a part in the spread of the gospel to all nations, for then the

end will come. Our hearts echo Paul's cry, Maranatha, «Come, 0 Lord!"

( 1 Cor. 1 6 : 2 2 ) .

STUDY QUESTIONS FOR PART 5

1 . What do you see as the most important changes in American culture

affecting churches in the past twenty years? How have those changes

affected churches you know?

2. Do you agree that churches in North America must go «against the

grain'' in the contemporary cultural context? What evidence do you

see of a changed cultural landscape?

3. Have you seen the trend toward declining church affiliation in your

community? How have you seen churches respond? What do you

think is the best response?

4. This book has been intentionally denominational (Baptist). Do you

think American Protestantism is becoming increasingly nondenom­

inational? Why or why not? How important is denominational affili­

ation to you in your choice of church?

5. Of the six major responses discussed in chapter 1 2 , which one (or

ones) do you find most appealing? Why?

6. In terms of the amazing impact of the modern missionary move­

ment, what did you find most surprising or encouraging? What do

you wish more people know about this amazing story?

7. Of the three major trends examined in chapter 1 3 (Pentecostal/char­

ismatic movement, the shift to the Global South, and advances in

global theological education) which do you think will prove most

important to the future of the church?

382 CHAPTER 13

B O O K S AND WEBSITES FOR FURTHER STUDY

Davis, Andrew M. Revitalize: Biblical Keys to Helping Your Church Come

Alive Again. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2 0 1 7 . This is the most recent of a

number of books on a new trend, called revitalizing or replanting,

addressing the need to give help to the 80 percent or more of churches

that are plateaued or declining.

Dever, Mark. Nine Marks of a Healthy Church. 3rd ed. Wheaton, IL: Cross­

way, 2 0 1 3 . Now in its third edition, this book has sold more than

100,000 copies and has been translated into twelve languages, with

three more in progress. It has also provided the title and emphases for

9Marks Ministries, which Dever began in 1998 and of which he is still

president. Some of the key ecclesiological marks that Dever advocates

are regenerate church membership, redemptive church discipline, and

plurality of leadership.

Jenkins, Philip. The Next Christendom: The Coming of Global Christianity.

Oxford, UK/New York: Oxford University Press, 2002. Jenkins gives

a fascinating account of how the center of the world Christian move­

ment has shifted to the Southern Hemisphere and the implications

that shift may have for the future.

Keller. Tim. Center Church: Doing Balanced, Gospel-Centered Ministry in

Your City. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2 0 1 2 . In this book, Keller offers

a wealth of insights from his decades of pastoral ministry in New York

City. Most notable is a superb section on contextualization.

Stetzer, Ed. Planting Missional Churches: Planting a Church That's Biblically

Sound and Reaching People in Culture. Nashville: B & H Academic,

2006. This is a revision of Stetzer's earlier work, Planting New Churches

in a Postmodern Age, and assumes that the type of churches we need

to plant in a postmodern age is missional churches. Stetzer addresses

the issues from the dual perspectives of his research as a missiologist

and his experience as a practitioner in church planting.

Surratt, Geoff, Warren Bird, and Greg Ligon. The Multi-Site Church Revolu­

tion: Being One Church in Many Locations. Grand Rapids: Zondervan,

2006. Undeniably one of the most important new models of church,

multisite churches may arguably be described as revolutionary. This

book is devoted primarily to the questions of what multisite churches

are, and how to become a multisite church (and do it well). Less atten-
INTO ALL THE WORLD 383

tion is discussed as to why churches should become multisite, and

very little attention is paid to the critiques of the multisite churches.

https://www.9marks.org. This website's home page gives a clear descrip­

tion of what it is about: "At 9Marks, we write books, articles, and book

reviews. We host conferences, record interviews, and consult with

church leaders. In short, we do everything we can to help pastors,

future pastors, and church members see what a biblical church looks

like, and to take practical steps for becoming one:'

http://www.hirr.hartsem.edu. This Web site is operated by the Hartford

Institute for Religion Research and contains, among other things, two

very interesting reports on megachurches.

http://www.pewresearch.org. The Pew Research Center conducts some of

the largest and most respected samples of religious opinions in their

periodic Religious Landscape Study. The one conducted in 2 0 1 5 has

generated numerous articles analyzing the shifts revealed in that survey.

 C O N C L U S I O N

A CALL F O R FAITHFUL

CHURCHES

I LOVE PASTORS. I THINK PASTORAL MINISTRY is a high calling, yet one that

is made increasingly difficult by the widespread assumption that the only

criterion of success in pastoral ministry is numerical growth. But recent

studies have documented the decline in religious affiliation across the

board in North America, with the result that the great majority of churches

are plateaued or declining. In many cases, pastors of such churches in such

areas suffer agony of spirit, both because they desire to see people come

to Christ and because they feel themselves a failure when years go by and

the numbers decline, stay the same or grow very slowly. Even pastors in

growing churches feel the pressure to continue to grow. Some pastors may

know that they can gather a crowd but be uneasy about the means they use

to draw people in.

No doubt there are many cases where pastors should feel a sense of

guilt over a lack of growth, because they have not sufficiently modeled

or taught evangelism, or because the worship, teaching, and fellowship

are so lackluster as to repel rather than attract prospective new members.

But the reasons for lack of growth may lie outside the churches. We live in

one of the most affiuent societies in history, and Jesus warned that wealth

can be a hindrance to entering the kingdom of heaven (Matt. 1 9 : 2 3 - 2 4 ) .

385
386 CONCLUSION

Our claim that Jesus is the only Savior seems narrow minded and bigoted

to many in our pluralistic context. Christ remains a stumbling block. We

uphold a sexual morality that seems ridiculous to most Americans today,

and even if we uphold it with a gracious, loving spirit, it may be offensive

to many. None of this is to excuse the failings of churches, which are all

imperfect. But in a society in which 80 percent of churches are plateaued

or declining, it seems likely that not all the fault lies with the churches.

Part of the reason for writing this book was to help pastors, especially

Baptist pastors, who may be struggling with questions concerning success

in pastoral ministry, for one of the implicit themes of this book is that a

successful church and a successful pastoral ministry is one that pleases

Christ by honoring God's Word and his design for the church. I cannot

promise that adopting a church covenant, renewing church discipline,

exercising care in baptism, and following all the other suggestions in this

book will produce great growth. It is likely to produce some numerical

growth in some cases, and spiritual growth in almost all cases, but that

is not the point. If God has given us instruction in his Word concerning

his people, he is honored and a church is successful to the degree that it

follows his instruction. Thus, the successful church is the faithful church.

Even the major metaphors for the church give hints that numerical

growth is not the point. It may be desired, but churches in the New Testa­

ment are nowhere commanded to grow in numbers or chided because

they haven't added more members lately. For example, the church is the

people of God, but the people of God throughout the Old Testament were

always a minority and often a remnant. They were not chosen because of

their large numbers; on the contrary, Israel was among the "fewest of all

peoples" (Deut. 7 : 7 ) . Similarly, the church is the body of Christ, but it need

not follow the pattern of most Americans and grow in such a way that it

becomes obese; the goal is health. As the temple of the Spirit, the chief

treasure of the church is not the size of its temple but that which dwells

within. Even the metaphor of the church as family reinforces this point.

Is a family with eight kids necessarily healthier or more successful than a

family with four kids?

The criterion every pastor and every church member should adopt as

defining success is faithfulness. If a church is faithful to be what Scripture

calls it to be-to be God's people, showing forth his gospel in their corpo­

rate life; to be a temple energized by the Spirit's ministry among them;

to be a building composed of living stones; to be a society governed as

A CALL FOR FAITHFUL CHURCHES 387

members of the body seek the direction of their Head, with the leadership

of godly shepherds; to be Christ's body, ministering his love in the world

and honoring his presence as they worship and observe his ordinances­

such a church is a faithful church and a successful church. Numerical

growth is desirable, because we desire to see people come to Christ, but it

is not the only manifestation of the blessing of God.

In the end, the one we seek to please in our churches must not be the

millennials, nor the traditionalists, nor the secularists, nor the members,

but the Lord of the church, and we please him by honoring his design for

the church. This book has presented how most Baptists have historically

understood that design, from what the church is to be, to who composes

it, to how it is governed, to what it is to do, to where it is headed. Much

of what has been written is the common teaching of evangelical Chris­

tians, and I rejoice in the common ground we share. My special concern

has been to present a Baptist perspective on these issues, not because I

believe Baptists are infallible ( the evidence to the contrary is incontro­

vertible). Rather, I present this perspective for three reasons: first, because

Baptists today seem to have lost their way on many of these issues and a

larger historical perspective can be of great help; second, because there is

no similar perspective available in print; third, because, in the end, I do

think Baptists have gotten these matters of ecclesiology right. Otherwise,

I would not be a Baptist. I invite readers to place the perspective in these

pages alongside that of Scripture and compare for themselves.

In the midst of the difficulties of day-to-day ministry in our churches,

it is all too easy to lose sight of the glorious destiny of the church. What

we see looks far less hopeful. But the whole Christian life is lived by faith,

not sight. And so I call pastors, and all those concerned for the welfare

of Christ's body, to see again the vision of what Christ's love will make of

his body. He will "make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water

through the word, and . . . present her to himself as a radiant church, with­

out stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless" (Eph.

5:26-27). Our joyful privilege is to be fellow workers with God in moving

his church toward that glorious destiny. I call upon pastors and leaders in

all the local assemblies where that bride is being prepared to give them­

selves to the high calling of presenting to Christ a faithful bride.

 SCRIPTURE INDEX

Genesis Zechariah Luke

2:18 202 4:6 85 2:41-50 133, 3 1 2

12:1-3 13 4 : 1 6 - 2 1 · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 272
Matthew
6:12-13 237
Exodus 4:4 192
12:42 192
4:19 83
18:19-22 ···················· 2 1 1
14:23 99, 100, 1 3 8
19:5-6 39 5:48 194
1 8 : 1 5 - 1 7 · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 308
28-29 236 6:9 35
22:7-30 · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 3 1 9
7:3-5 180
Leviticus 22:17-19 318
9:35 260
27:30 138 22:20 319
10:42 224

Numbers 13 63 John

13:24-30 63, 99 1:12 35, 1 7 5

8:5-22 · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 236
8:10 239 16:18 1 3 , 3 1 , 49, 1:14 53

27:18-23 236, 237 54,80,367 3:5-8 257

28:41 236 16:19 85, 159 4:24 273

18:15-17 159, 165 6:63 257

Deuteronomy
18:15-18 .40 7:39 84, 265
4:20 39
18:15-20 53, 1 3 5 , 1 5 8 10:11 191
7:6 39
18:17 31 10:11-3 192
7:7 386
18:18 85 13:34 128

2 Chronicles 18:20 179, 322 13:34-35 .40

7:15-16 53 19:13-15 238, 308 14:6 256

19:21 283 16:13 256

Nehemiah
19:23 120 16:14 273
8-9 127
22:37-39 .40 17:20-21 .59
9-10 127
24:14 381
9:38 127 Acts
26:17-30 319
1 160
10:28-29 · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 127
26:26-27 · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 3 1 8
1:8 83
10:30-39 · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 127
28: 1 9 104, 176, 302
10:39 128 1:14 36
28:19-20 104, 259, 286,
1:21-22 67
Psalms 299,316,367
2 1 3 , 33, 38, 4 1 , 79,
19:1 51 28:20 260
83,84,281,286
29:2 272
5 1 : 3 - 1 4 · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 282
2:29 36
96 51
Mark 2:38 105, 302, 3 1 7
96:9-12 51
1:10 315 2:41 3 1 , 76, 82, 94,
148 51
3:14 237 104, 1 3 1 , 176,
150:6 51
3:35 35 299,303,317

Isaiah 6:5 238 2:42 . 4 1 , 66, 187,

56:7 51 10:13-16 308 260,265,318

10:16 238 2:42, 46 271

Jeremiah
10:41-45 151 2:42-47 1 8 , 1 7 8 , 252,
7:11 51
10:43-45 224 253,259
31:31-34 309
10:45 258 2:43 281

Hosea 2:43, 47 280

14:12-26 ···················· 3 1 9
l:10 39 14:22-23 318 2:44 4 1 , 359

2:23 39 16:16 104 2:44-47 60, 1 6 8

388
SCRIPTURE INDEX 389

2:45 282 1 1 :30 190, 208 20:29-31 192

2:46 359 12:1-2 188 20:30 83

2:47 83, 94, 259, 268, 1 2:5 32, 33 20:31 191

281,282,286 12:17 210 21 131

2:48 313 13 1 5 3 , 238 21:8 188

4 38 13:1-3 160, 179, 239 21:18 190, 208, 2 1 0

4:4 3 1 , 82, 94, 1 3 1 , 13:2 32 22:16 302

132, 3 1 3 13:2-3 32, 1 5 8 , 1 6 5 28:8 238

4:28-29 158 13:3 237 28:24 131, 313

4:32 60, 79, 168 13:12 131, 313

Romans
5:1 237 13:15-42 272
1:6-7 30, 205
5:11 33 13:48 131, 313
1:7 39
5:12 168 13:49 286
1:16 257
5:12-14 280 14:21 313
2:29 310
5:14 131, 313 14:21-23 94
4:16 26
6 1 8 8 , 222, 223, 224, 14:23 3 1 , 32, 76, 1 6 1 ,
4:19 138
225,226,228,237 187,208,216,237
6:3 302
6:1-2 222 14:25 131, 313
6:3-4 315
6:1-4 234 14:27 160, 286
6:3-10 302
6:1-6 160, 237 15 1 5 3 , 154, 155,
6:4 315
6:2 224 1 58, 160, 1 8 8
7:9 133, 3 1 1
6:2-4 222 1 5 : 2 , 4, 6, 22-23 208
8:9 53
6:2-6 165, 168 15:2,4,6, 22-23 190
8:29 194
6:3 15 8 , 223, 23 7 15:4, 12 160
9:3 36
6:5 78, 160 15:4, 22 31
11:29 205
6:6 237 1 5:6 188
12:1 5 1 , 272
6:7 82, 1 3 1 , 268, 15:13 210
12:4-5 44, 174
286, 3 1 3 15:22 33, 78, 158,
12:5 44, 45, 93
7:28 237 160, 1 6 8
12:8 1 9 1 , 193
8:1 237 16:4 190, 208
12:9-16 178
8:2-4 32 16:5 3 1 , 82, 1 3 1 , 3 1 3
12:9-21 82, 286
8:3 32 16:14 94
12:13 267
8:12 105, 1 3 1 , 299, 3 1 3 16:14-15 131, 313
12:16 267
8:17-18 238 16:15 299
13:8 282
8:25 131, 313 16:33 131, 313
15:7 1 3 8 , 267
8:36-38 131, 313 16:33-34 307
15:26-27 267
8:38 315 17:4 131, 313
16:1... 32, 222, 230,
9 82 17:12 131, 313
232,233,236
9:9, 1 8 131, 313 17:34 131, 313
16:5 32, 359
9:12,17 238 18:3-4 206
16:16 32, 39
9:31 3 1 , 82, 268, 286 18:5 207
16:23 33, 359
9:35 131, 313 18:8 1 3 1 , 307, 3 1 3

10:42 287 19:4-5 131, 313 1 Corinthians

10:44-48 307 19:6 238 1:2 32, 39, 63, 94, 205

10:47-48 131, 313 19:20 268 1:13 61

10:48 302 19:32 29 1:13-17 132

11:18 286 1 9 : 3 2 , 39, 41 78 1:14-17 313

11:20-21 131, 313 20 191 1:16 307

11:21 94 20:7 3 1 8 , 333 3:5 224

11:22 33, 78 20:17 1 9 1 , 208 3:7 80, 83

11:23 286 20:28 3 1 , 39, 190, 3:9 50, 80

11:24 1 3 1 , 268, 3 1 3 1 9 1 , 192 3:10-11 54

11:26 41 20:28-31 32, 1 9 1 3:11-15 50

390 SCRI PTURE INDEX

4:2 192 12:27 42 3:21 1 3 , 80

4:15 359 14:23 32, 33 4 83, 3 1 7

4:32 178 14:24-25 280 4:3 257

5 94 14:26 273, 276 4:3-6 176

5:1-13 135 14:33, 40 76 4:4 59, 62

5:2 158 14:40 240 4:4-5 44

5:4 53, 179 15:9 32, 39 4:5 . 4 3 , 44, 3 1 7

5:7 319 16:1 32 4:5-6 93

5:9-12 174 16:1-4 158 4:11... 3 1 , 32, 48,

5:9-13 160, 165 16:1, 19 33 1 8 8 , 1 9 1 , 208,

5:11 94 16:2 138 256,260

5:11-12 175 16:22 381 4:11-12 138, 187

5:12-13 76, 145 4:11-16 1 9 1 , 205

2 Corinthians
5:13 40 4:12 175, 1 8 9 , 283
1:1 39
6:11 53 4:12, 16 46
2:6 1 5 8 , 160
6:19 50 4:13-16 .48
2:6-8 165
10:16 318 4:15 46, 83
6:16 50
10:16-17 .42, 1 1 3 , 1 1 4 , 4:16 . 4 8 , 124, 1 7 9
8:1 33
323,325 4:29 138
8-9 158
10:17 43, 326, 5:21-33 .48
9:13 267
329,332 5:22-33 199
13:14 4 1 , 257
10:21 318 5:23 46

10:32 39
Galatians 5:23-24 202
1:8 170
11:1 170 5:23-27 .32
1:8-9 84, 159, 165
11:3 202 5:23, 29-30 .46
1:13 32, 39
11:16 39 5:23-33 .47
1:19 36, 2 1 0
1 1 : 1 7 , 1 8 , 20, 33, 34 325 5:25 80
2:10 283
5:25-27 1 3 , 64,
1 1 : 1 7 - 2 2 · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 329
2:12 210
11:17-34 299, 323, 125, 1 8 5
3:26 66
325,326,332 5:26-27 387
3:27 302
11:18 32, 33 5:27 8
3:28 54, 65
11:20 3 1 8 , 329 6:4 311
5:13 128, 282
11:20-26 158
6:1 135 Philippians
11:21 325
6:2 128 1:1 3 1 , 94, 190,
11:22 39, 329
6:10 35, 179, 282 208,222,232
11:23-26 337
l:18 84
11:24 3 1 8 , 323 Ephesians
1:27 138
11:24-25 1 1 3 , 323 1:1 40, 94
2:1-2 60
11:26 53, 323 1:15-17 47
2:3-4, 7 138
11:27 324, 325 l:18 47
3:6 32
11:28 324 1:20-23 .47
4:15 32, 5 1
11:29 1 1 4 , 324, 1:22 46

325,326 Colossians
1:22-23 · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 46, 47
11:30 324 2:8-9 325 1:2 4 1 , 94

12 45, 363 2:10 47 1:18 46

12:7 175, 180 2:19 35 1 : 1 8 , 24 46

12:7-21 204 2:20 3 1 , 67, 1 8 8 , 257 1 : 2 3 , 25 224

12:13 43, 303, 3 1 7 2:21 50, 53, 54 2:11-12 310

12:14-20 .44 2:21-22 14, 50, 54 2:12 315

12:16-17 .42 2:22 84 2:19 46, 48, 124

12:18 54 3:10 13 3:13-16 178

12:25-26 45, 178 3:10, 21 32 3:16 128, 1 9 1 ,

12:26 79, 282 3:20-21 137 256,260,267

SCRIPTURE INDEX 391

4:15 32, 359 3:15 35, 257, 265 1 Peter

4:16 32, 33, 68 4:6 224 1:22 138

4:13 32, 275, 276 2:2 192

1 Thessalonians
4:14 238 2:4 54
1:1 32, 94
5:16 32 2:4-5 175
1:1-2 138
5:17 1 5 3 , 154, 170, 2:5 35, 5 1 , 54,
1:8 287
190, 1 9 1 , 193, 80, 1 7 4 , 2 5 7
2:14 39
206,215 2:5, 9 51
5:11 267
5 : 1 7 , 19 190 2:9 26, 189
5:11-15 178
5:19 208 2:9-10 39, 2 7 1
5:12 1 9 1 , 193, 209
5:19-20 135, 1 6 1 2:25 190, 1 9 1
5:12-13 175, 240
5:22 238 3:15 345
5:12-22 82, 286
6:18 267 3:21 302, 304

2 Thessalonians 4:8 136

2 Timothy
1:2 94 4:10 1 3 8 , 189, 205
1:6 238
1:4 39 4:17 35

3:14 68 4:5 188

5 191
3:14-15 135 5:1 190, 1 9 1 , 208
Titus

1 194, 195, 196, 5:1-4 191

1 Timothy

199,238 5:2 190, 1 9 1 , 192

1:20 135

1:5 1 6 1 , 1 8 7 , 190, 5:2-4 194

2:9-15 199

216,237 5:3 1 5 1 , 194, 1 9 5

2:12 230, 232, 233,
5:4 191
234,235 1:5-9 1 9 1 , 223, 366
5:5 190
2:13 202 1:6 195, 197, 223

3 194, 1 9 5 , 1 9 6 , 1:6-9 194, 205, 286

2 Peter
199, 223, 224, 1:7 190, 192,
3:11-12 381
230,238 208,211,223
1 John
3:1 190 1:8 195
1:3 41
3:1-2 208 1:9 84, 1 9 1 , 197, 223
1:5-7 267
3:1-7 1 9 1 , 205,
Philemon
286,366 2:9 267
2 359 2:9-10 40
3:2 32, 154, 190,

1 9 1 , 195, 197, 3:1 37

Hebrews

2 1 1 , 223, 2 3 1 , 3 : 1 0 , 14 40, 267

10:24 267

256,260 3:16-18 282

10:24-25 178
3:2, 4-5 378 3:17 258
10:25 12, 1 3 8 , 175
3:2, 5 233 4:7-8, 1 1 - 1 2 , 1 9 - 2 1 .. 267
11:6 325
3:2-7 194, 223 4:7-8, 19-20 .40
12:15 180
3:4 197 12:22-23 64 2John
3:4-5 193
13:7 1 9 1 , 194 1 190, 208
3:5 39, 1 5 3 , 1 9 3 ,
1 3 : 7 , 17 191
198,223 3 John
1 3 : 7 , 17, 24 192, 209
3:5, 1 2 223 1 190, 208
13:15 51
3:6 1 9 5 , 223
13:16 5 1 , 267 Jude
3:8 3 1 , 227, 232
13:17 1 3 8 , 152, 170, 1:3 67
3:8-13 222, 223,
1 7 5 , 180, 192,
226,228 Revelation
193,240
3:9 223 1:6 5 1 , 189
13:20 191
3:10 223, 227 2-3 2 1 1 , 212

3:11... 223, 230, 2 3 1 , James 5:9 66

232,233,236,245 2:2 30 5:10 51

3:12 193, 227, 5:14 190, 192, 208, 240 19:6-9 323

231,232 5:16 128 21:3 13

 SUBJECT INDEX

9marks .357, 360, 3 6 1 , 383 believer baptism 176

Bennett, Dennis .372

A
Berkouwer, G. C 68
Abraham 26, 28, 29, 309
Bilezikian 199
accountability 1 3 3 , 175, 180, 209,
bishop 20, 3 1 , 49, 58, 59, 65, 67, 85,
217, 3 1 1 , 3 1 2
98, 1 4 8 - 1 5 0 , 152, 1 5 5 ,
Adam 188, 201
159, 1 6 1 , 162, 169,
African church 12
189, 1 9 0 , 2 0 4 , 3 7 5
Akin, Daniel 68, 157, 182
Black, David Alan 133, 3 1 2
Alexander, Paul 78, 358
Boa, Kenneth 268
Allison, Gregg 2 1 , 27, 28, 76, 86, 1 1 3 ,
body of Christ 35, 42-46, 48, 49, 6 1 , 62,
146, 147, 156, 1 5 8 , 1 6 1 ,
7 1 , 8 0 , 8 5 , 9 3 , 100, 157,
163, 165, 178, 197, 199,
174, 1 7 5 , 2 0 3 , 2 5 6 - 2 5 8 , 2 8 2 ,
208,222,226,231,252,
303,309,324,325,332,367,386
295,296,303,308,309,
Book of Common Prayer .324
3 1 1 , 3 1 5 , 324, 327,
Brand, Chad 146, 147, 152,
328,338,358-361
154, 1 5 7 , 2 4 6
American Baptists 92, 1 1 9 , 17 6
bride of Christ 2 1 , 35, 185
Anabaptists 2 1 , 63, 7 1 , 92, 95, 97, 1 0 1 ,
Bridge, Donald 97
134, 1 6 3 , 3 0 6 , 3 0 7 , 3 0 8
Bunyan, John 330, 3 3 1
Anderson, Justice 92, 109
by-laws 336
"angel of the church'' 211

Anglican Church 102

c
called-out people 39, 62, 70
apostles 3 1 , 38, 66-68, 94, 95, 149,
call to ministry 204, 205, 239, 240
150, 1 5 8 , 160, 162, 1 8 7 ,
Calvin, John 12, 70, 92, 95, 100, 190,
188,212,224,226,237,
206,224,225,304,307,
238,253,260,272,299,369
309,314,321,322,325
apostolic authority .23 7
Campbell, Colleen Carroll 159
Arminius, Jakob 103
Carey, William 289, 369, 370
Arnold, Clinton .47, 130, 132, 3 1 4
Carroll, B. H 235
atonement 103
Carson, D. A 150, 1 5 3 , 159, 194,
authority of the church 126
254, 274, 283, 3 1 6 ,
Azusa Street Revival .3 72
317,338,350

B catechism 96

Banks, Robert 1 5 , 36, 377 catholicity 57, 59, 65, 66, 69,

baptism of the Holy Spirit 27 72, 7 3 , 8 3 , 2 6 7

Baptist confessions 104, 105, 109, 1 1 0 , Charleston Baptist Association 107

1 1 4 , 120, 140, 159, Christ and the church 47, 49, 202

191,225,315,330 Christ's headship .47, 147, 1 6 1

Baptist distinctives 1 2 , 2 1 , 147 church growth 82, 168, 169, 256

Baptist Faith and Message 28, 107, 1 1 3 , church membership 7, 1 7 , 39, 46, 63, 64,

1 1 4 , 156, 165, 92, 102, 1 0 9 - 1 1 8 , 120,

198,328,330 1 2 2 - 1 2 6 , 1 2 9 - 1 3 6 , 140,

Barrett, David 85, 373 1 4 1 , 145, 159, 162, 166,

Bartchy, Scott 36, 38, 159, 188, 202 171-185,245,246,263,

Beasley-Murray, G. R 302-304, 269,270,288,303,310,

307-309,338 327-333,336,362,363,382

392
SUBJECT INDEX 393

Church ofEngland 1 0 1 , 102, 103 deacon 3 1 , 157, 160, 165, 183, 189,

Clark, Stephen .40, 159, 179, 2 0 1 , 193,213,221-237,243,245

222,231,233,258,302 deacon and elder 234

Clowney, Edmund 26, 27, 86, 2 5 1 , 252 deaconess 165, 230-236, 245

coming of the Holy Spirit ..... 13, 14, 265, 272 Deacon Family Ministry Plan 228

commitment 12, 19, 20, 37, 38, 45, 46, death of Christ 3 1 9 , 335

democracy 8 1 , 157, 165, 368

7 9 , 9 2 , 9 4 , 9 5 , 9 9 , 100, 104,
denominations 19, 25, 42, 6 1 , 62, 85, 95,
1 1 5 , 1 1 8 - 1 2 0 , 122, 123, 1 2 5 - 1 2 9 ,
120, 1 3 1 , 148, 149, 1 5 1 ,
1 3 1 , 133, 134, 1 3 6 , 164, 166, 169,
154, 164, 1 7 7 , 2 7 1 , 2 8 8 ,
170, 172, 173, 1 7 8 - 1 8 2 , 1 8 4 , 2 0 4 ,
293,316,318,328,338,
213,219,241,257,262,264,
348,369,372,373,375
268-270,283,284,293,299,
Depression, U.S 284
300,305,314,316-318,333
Dever, Mark 2 1 , 26, 58, 60, 63-69, 78,
communion 58, 59, 6 1 , 87, 107, 108,
86, 107, 1 1 0 , 1 1 1 , 1 1 5 , 1 2 3 - 1 2 �
1 1 2 , 1 1 3 , 123, 140, 185,
1 3 5 , 139, 140, 146, 1 5 3 , 1 5 8 , 160,
2 7 1 , 273, 294, 3 1 8 ,
163, 164, 166, 169, 174, 178, 1 8 2 ,
323-334,338,367,375
1 8 3 , 190, 1 9 4 , 2 0 8 - 2 1 0 , 2 1 3 , 2 3 5 ,
competence of the church 85
236,245,246,261,288,311,314,
complementarian 199, 200, 201, 202, 203
329,330,358,361-363,382
congregational polity . . . . . 1 1 1 , 154, 1 5 5 , 159,
Deweese, Charles .45, 104, 109, 1 1 0 ,
1 6 1 , 164, 168, 193 120, 1 2 1 , 1 2 5 - 1 2 7 ,

Constantine 1 7 , 58, 97, 98, 100, 140 130, 1 4 1 , 1 6 9 , 2 3 5 , 3 1 4

constitution 126, 164, 2 1 3 , 2 1 8 , 229 diaconal ministry 228

consubstantiation .320 discipleship 252, 262, 264, 268

conversion 17, 38, 39, 97-99, 1 2 1 , discipline 1 7 , 3 1 , 63, 64, 70, 79, 84,

1 3 1 , 133, 196,204,266, 94, 95, 108, 109, 1 1 2 , 1 1 5 ,

267,298,302-306,313, 1 1 6 , 120, 1 2 2 - 1 2 7 , 1 3 4 - 1 4 1 ,

337,338,362,369 145, 146, 1 5 9 - 1 6 1 , 165, 174, 175,

corpus permixtum 62, 63, 97, 99, 108 180,209,242,246,252,288,330,

covenant 26-28, 45, 102, 104, 1 0 6 - 1 0 8 , 347,360,362,363,382,386

114, 1 2 3 , 1 2 6 - 1 2 9 , 135-137, dispensationalism 27

Donatists 62, 99
139, 1 7 8 - 1 8 0 , 182, 1 8 4 , 2 4 1 ,
Duncan, J. Ligon III 2 6 1 , 275-277, 339
262,270,308,309,318,
Durnbaugh, Donald 92, 97
319,339,359,363,386

covenant theology 26, 309, 339 E

Cowan, Steven 146, 150, 157, edification 179, 2 5 1 , 252, 261,

194,212,246 273,276,279,373

Cowen, Gerald 146, 204, 228 egalitarianism 198, 202

Criswell, W A 204 elder 5 1 , 1 1 2 , 147, 1 4 9 - 1 5 3 , 157,

Crosby, David 168, 169 1 6 1 , 165, 169, 1 7 0 - 1 7 2 ,

Culpepper, R. Alan 237, 240 189-198,202-219,223,

culture wars 344 226-234,238,242-247,378

elder and deacon 223

Cyprian 12, 58, 150
elements of worship 273, 276, 277
Cyril of Jerusalem 65
emerging church 8
D
Episcopal Church 151
Dagg, John L... 1 3 5 , 146, 147, 176, 204, episkopos 3 1 , 149, 150, 152,
226,315,328-330,338 189, 190, 1 9 2 , 2 2 4

Dargan, E. C 1 5 3 , 209 equality 198, 199, 2 0 1 , 377

Davis, Andrew 179, 208, 2 1 6 , 225, 228, Erickson, Millard 27, 69, 1 1 1 , 146,

229,285,364-366,382 1 6 1 , 162, 1 6 7 , 2 5 1 , 2 5 3 ,

Dawn, Marva 278 299,301,334,335

394 SUBJECT I N D E X

eucharist 329 Harper, Michael 196, 3 50, 3 7 4

evangelism 18, 82, 83, 109, 174, 203, 242, heaven 35, 68, 70, 85, 120, 124, 264,

251-256,259-264,267,268, 307,321,322,346,385

273,276,279,280,285-289, hell 346

337,352,362,385 Hellerman, Joseph 36-38, 87, 175, 178,

evangelist 188 180,257,266,303,339

Eve 201 Helwys, Thomas 20, 1 0 2 - 1 0 4 ,

ex opere operato 295, 3 0 1 , 306 1 1 0 , 294, 334

Hendricks, William 133, 3 1 1

F
heresy 264, 346
faithfulness 10, 67, 106, 180,
Heyrman, Christine Leigh 119
192,202,243,386
Hinson, E. Glenn 58, 238
Fee, Gordon . 4 3 , 50, 1 1 4 , 196, 324, 325
hirr.hartsem.edu 167, 35 3, 383
feminism 199, 200
historical developments 92
foot-washing 297
holiness of God .40
forgiveness 99, 196, 268, 2 8 1 ,
holiness of the church 62, 63, 64, 99
304,320,324
Hollenweger, Walter J 372
Freeman, J. D 92, 323, 362, 376
Holy Spirit 1 1 - 1 4 , 27-30, 37, 4 1 , 42, 49,
Furman, Richard 120
50,53-55,62, 79,84,85,93,

G 1 3 1 , 137-139, 158, 1 9 1 , 2 0 0 ,
Garrett, James Leo Jr 92, 107, 120, 1 2 5, 238,257,264-266,271,272,
136, 154, 157, 1 5 8 , 1 6 1 ,
286,302-304,313,372-374
162, 164, 168, 170,
homosexuality 344, 375
171,246,314
Horton, Michael 113
gathered church 92, 100, 323
house church 33, 359, 372, 375
George, Timothy 38, 52, 87, 100, 275,
Howell, R. B. C. 225, 234, 235
284,330,331,369
Hudson, Winthrop 155
Gonzalez, Justo .368
Hughes, R. Kent 275, 277
grace 4 1 , 42, 70, 7 1 , 85, 1 1 3 , 139,
hymns 275, 278
177,204,238,239,257,266,

267,286,295,298-308,
I

Ignatius of Antioch 149

320,326,336,372

Graham, Billy 1 8 8 , 2 6 1 , 339 image of God 47

Graves, J. R 235 immersion 108, 176, 294, 3 0 1 ,

Great Commission 1 7 5 , 259, 286, 287, 314-316,328

290, 3 1 6 , 3 1 7 , individualism 39, 122, 134, 156

351,357,370 infant baptism 84, 95, 96, 103, 109, 1 1 0 ,

Green, Michael... 40, 47, 268, 287, 376 133, 1 7 6 , 2 3 4 , 3 0 6 - 3 1 2 ,

Gregory I (the Great) .283 328,329,332,338,339

Grenz, Stanley 7 1 , 109, 1 1 1 , 1 6 1 , 162, International Mission Board 371

167, 170, 2 5 1 , 297, Internet 1 1 , 133

299,305,330,331 invisible church 59, 63, 65, 106, 299, 3 1 7

Griffith, Benjamin 1 1 5 , 1 5 5 , 160 Irenaeus 67, 85, 150, 222

Grudem, Wayne 47, 1 5 7 , 199, 208, 266, Israel.. 1 3 , 26, 27, 28, 39, 3 1 9 , 339, 386

294,295,304,311,326,374
J
Guder, Darrell 3 5 1 , 380
Jamieson, Bobby 1 7 8 , 303, 3 58 , 362

H Jenkins, Philip ..... 14, 2 9 1 , 368, 374-375, 382

Haines, Stephen 122 Jerusalem church 153

Hammett, John 4, 7, 60, 1 1 4 , 123, 1 4 1 , Jerusalem Council 155

174-179, 183, 1 8 8 , 2 4 0 , 2 4 6 , Jewett, Paul 199, 306-309, 339

254,255,286,293,297,300, Johnson, Terry 275-277

303,307-316,319,327,328, Johnson, W. B 210

333,335,338,359 justification .... .37, 63, 100, 203, 295, 303, 394
SUBJECT INDEX 395

K McBeth, Leon 95, 103, 140, 1 7 1 , 234,

Karkkainen, Veli-Matti 154, 373-377 235,261,283,330

Keach, Benjamin 225, 275 McBrien, Richard 49, 58, 150, 295,

Keller, Tim 2 85, 289, 349, 350, 382 296,319,320

keys of the kingdom 85, 159 McConnell, C. Douglas .380

Kimball, Dan 173 meaning of baptism 176, 294, 300-303,

kingdom 5 1 , 85, 120, 137, 1 59, 310, 315, 316

189,352,371,381,385 means of grace 295, 298, 3 0 1 , 304, 326

knowledge 48, 107, 137, 2 0 1 , 261 megachurches 168, 353, 354, 355, 383

Kraft, Charles 378 Merkle, Benjamin L . . . 7, 123, 1 4 1 , 146, 174,

Kung, Hans 68, 87 176, 179, 18 3, 1 9 1 , 194,

197, 1 9 9 , 2 0 8 - 2 1 0 , 2 1 6 ,
L
226-228,231,233,246,247
Landmark Baptists 71
metaphors for the church 386
Latourette, Kenneth Scott .369
Milne, Bruce 257, 267, 269, 270
Lee, Jason 102, 285
Minear, Paul 34, 87
Leeman, Jonathan 2 1 , 59, 60, 123, 128,
ministry of the Holy Spirit 37, 84, 372
1 3 5 , 1 36 , 1 4 1 , 146, 1 58 ,
missions 14, 156, 228, 254, 262, 289,
165, 1 73, 1 7 4 , 2 1 8 , 2 4 6 ,
290,369-371,375,380
247,357,358,360,362
mode ofbaptism 84, 3 0 1 , 3 1 4 , 3 1 5
Leonard, Bill 170, 240, 296,
Moody, Dale 7 1 , 98, 205, 222, 285,
300,302,310,328
3 1 1 , 3 1 5 , 3 1 9 , 334
Littell, Franklin 95
Morris, Leon 150, 1 6 1
liturgy 272, 374
multisite church 8, 33, 60, 78,
local church 16, 32-35, 42-46, 59-64,
355-361,382,383
69, 7 5 , 8 0 , 9 3 , 1 08, 1 1 4 , 123,

1 5 0 - 1 5 8 , 166, 1 75, 177, 184, N

187-189,200,207,216,217, nature of the church 17, 26, 32, 35, 37,

245,259,260,266,317,325, 39, 4 1 , 42, 50, 55,

327,329,332,358-363,374 5 7 , 5 8 , 6 1 - 6 6 , 7 1 , 72,

Longenecker, Richard 36, 7 1 , 1 59, 75, 7 6 , 8 6 , 9 1 , 100, 147,

188,237,253,286 155, 156,252,256-259,

love 13, 1 5 , 19, 20, 37, 40, 4 1 , 45, 49, 265,267,291,376,377

128, 129, 1 3 6 - 1 3 9 , 175, 179-182, Neill, Stephen 98, 369

192,243,244,257-259,265-268, Nelson, David 20

281-285,287,305,314,317,323-325, neo-charismatics 372, 373

331,332,337,366,369,385,387 new covenant 27, 28, 308, 309, 3 1 9

love of God 139, 257, 258, 259 New Hampshire Confession of Faith .... .330

Lumpkin, William L. 28, 45, 6 1 , 104-106, Newton, Phil 6, 20, 126, 137, 146,

234,238,330 2 1 3 , 2 14 , 247, 364

Luther, Martin 52, 70, 86, 92, 93, 96, Nicene Creed 57, 80

97, 100, 1 0 1 , 2 0 4 , 2 0 5 , Noll, Mark 2 1 0 , 288

295,298,306,307,320,321 Norman, R. Stanton 20, 146, 147,

152-157,246
M
North American Baptists 92, 1 1 9 , 176
MacArthur, John 1 3 3 , 170
North American Mission Board 14, 1 3 3
Malone, Fred 309
Northern (American)
Marcellino, Jerry 277, 278, 279
Baptist tradition 2 9 1 , 330, 374
Maring, Norman 155
Novatians 62
marks of the church 17, 26, 55, 57, 63,

72, 83, 86, 87, 0

91,253,258,267 obedience . 4 0 , 65, 8 1 , 83, 105, 106, 1 1 0 ,

Mass 7 1 , 72, 97, 258, 170, 1 9 7 , 2 0 6 , 2 1 1 , 2 7 6 , 2 8 6 - 2 9 0 ,

318,320,321 305,313-317,326,327,337,351,367
396 SUBJECT I N D E X

offerings 333 presbyter 5 1 , 149, 190

"open" membership 110 presbyterian polity 152, 169

ordinances 7, 18, 42, 45, 59, 7 1 , priesthood of believers 239

103, 109, 1 1 4 , 1 3 7 , 139, Pritchard, G. A 2 8 1 , 349

146, 1 7 9 , 2 2 5 , 2 5 6 , 2 8 2 , Promise Keepers 19, 255, 3 3 1

295-301,309,336-338,387 prophet 18 8

ordination 204, 2 1 7 , 236, 237, 238, 239, Puritans 37, 1 0 1 , 103, 163

240,241,243,245,247,297 purpose of worship 5 1 , 273

Origen 307
Q
Orthodox Church 297
qualifications of deacons 223, 224
overseer. . . . . 3 1 , 169, 1 8 9 - 1 9 3 , 208, 2 1 1 , 223
qualifications of elders 198
p
R
papacy 3 1 , 50
racism 19, 66
Parham, Charles Fox .3 72
Radbertus, Paschasius .3 20
Parshall, Phil... 378, 379, 380
Rainer, Thom 167, 168, 287, 289,
Passover 272, 3 1 9
347,348,363-365
pastoral ministry 192, 204-209, 214,
Ratramnus 320
215,225,228,240-245,
Rauschenbusch, Walter 283, 284
382,385,386
reason 13 , 18 , 19, 29, 54, 6 1 , 77, 78, 82,
pastoral oversight 215
1 0 8 - 1 1 0 , 124, 148, 156, 167, 1 8 1 ,
Patterson, Paige 29, 157, 194, 2 1 2 , 246
201,202,215,217,219,224,226,
Pendleton, J. M 20, 108
230,232,235,241,259,268,280,
Pentecost.. 13, 14, 27-30, 78, 82,
287,288,290,298,301,305,313,
84,94, 1 7 6 , 2 6 5 , 3 7 2
322,323,326,329,331,333,334,
people of God 2 6 - 3 1 , 34, 35, 39-42,
347,356,363,365,378,386
6 1 , 6 6 , 7 1 , 8 4 , 9 3 , 109,
Reformation 17, 20, 59, 65, 69-73, 87,
256,257,267,377,386
96, 100, 1 0 1 , 150, 163, 190,
persecution 14, 62, 96-102, 150, 288
205,224,238,253,258,
Peterson, David 37, 272, 273
274,275,283,293,295,
Philadelphia Baptist Association . . . . . 238, 275
296,306,307,322,369
Phillips, Richard 58, 6 1 , 63, 65, 67, 69
Reformation theology .306
Phoebe of Cenchrea 230, 232, 233, 236
regeneratechurch members 17, 1 1 5
Piper, John 146, 176, 196, 199, 209, 2 1 3 ,
regeneration 64, 95, 106, 109, 1 1 4 ,
215,218,225,226,235,294
1 1 5 , 120-124, 129, 133,
planting churches 76, 348, 3 7 1
171, 174,256,302,310
pope 204
religious liberty .368
post-Christian 8, 1 5 , 291, 343, 344
remembrance 1 1 3 , 300, 3 2 1 , 323
postdenominationalism 18
repentance 103, 105, 125, 1 3 1 , 286, 297,
power 14, 44, 47, 53, 55, 70, 83-85,
302,310-313,324,325,337
106, 1 1 2 , 1 1 5 , 137, 149, 1 5 5 ,
responsibilities of deacons 2 2 1 , 228
159, 1 6 0 , 2 0 9 , 2 1 7 , 2 2 6 , 2 2 8 ,
responsibilities of elders 191, 214
237,244,257,259,304,
Reymond, Robert 152, 1 5 3 , 154
309,317,320,351
Robinson, John 38, 8 1
pragmatism 14, 169, 358
Roman Catholic Church 64, 65, 72, 149
prayer 10, 32, 5 1 , 137, 226, 240,
Ryken, Philip . . . . . 58, 63, 65, 67, 69, 2 6 1 , 339
242,243,253,255,260,

262,268,273,276,277, s
283,305,339,366,378 sacraments 17, 42, 70-73, 9 1 , 253,

preaching 17, 19, 70-73, 83, 84, 9 1 , 95, 258, 282, 295-300,

104, 1 1 5 , 132, 1 3 5 , 169, 1 8 8 , 190, 306,336,337,373

191,208,214,215,242,253,256, Saddleback Community Church ... 262, 339

258,260,261,273-276,311,333, saints 39, 63, 64, 67, 93, 95, 103,

336,356-358,362,366,373 112, 114, 1 8 7 , 2 5 2 , 2 8 8 , 3 6 7

SUBJECT INDEX 397

salvation 20, 38, 42, 59, 63, 66, 6 9 - 7 1 , Summary of Church Discipline . . . . 107, 1 1 5 ,

1 1 0 , 1 1 3 , 132, 137, 139, 146, 120, 125,

174-177,257,265,283, 155

302-306,316,320,326, Sunday school 200, 262, 264, 2 7 1 , 354

328,331,336,346,372 Sutton, Jerry 163

sanctification 64 synagogue 272

Sandy Creek Baptist Association 189 syncretism 3 79

Sargeant, Kirnon 278, 279, 280, 349 synod 151

Saucy, Robert 27, 222, 237, 2 7 1 ,
T
272, 297, 304, 3 1 3
tabernacle 52, 53, 272
Schreiner, Thomas 1 3 1 , 146, 199,
technology 348, 358, 367
233,302,315,320
temple 14, 30, 35, 49, 50-55, 6 1 ,
Second London Confession .... 45, 106, 1 1 2 ,
67, 7 1 , 7 5 , 8 0 , 8 4 - 8 6 , 9 3 ,
1 5 5 , 238, 277,
127, 1 3 3 , 2 5 3 , 2 5 6 - 2 5 8 ,
322,326
271,272,312,359,386
sects 119

selection of elders 2 1 7 , 242 temple of the Holy Spirit... . .49, 50, 257, 2 7 1

Septuagint 29, 50 Tertullian 40

session 151 Thomas, Derek W. H 2 6 1 , 277, 339

Sexuality 344, 345 Thumma, Scott 353, 354, 355

Shelley, Bruce 8 1 , 1 7 1 , 269 Toon, Peter 150, 246

small groups 55, 109, 2 7 1 , 279, Towns, Elmer 7 1 , 256, 278, 279

285,300,354 tradition 20, 59, 67, 97, 200,

Smyth, John 20, 102, 103, 1 1 0 , 211,222,294,307,373

225,294,314,334 traditional church 360, 3 79

Snyder, Howard 69, 268, 3 7 1 transubstantiation 297, 3 1 9 , 320

social gospel 283, 284 Trent, Council of... 295, 297

sola Scriptura 70 Trinity 40, 154, 177, 265, 379

soul competence 52 Troeltsch, Ernst 119

Southern Baptist Convention 8, 1 1 7 , truth 20, 26, 38, 7 1 , 8 1 , 83, 123, 129,

1 1 8 , 1 2 1 , 122, 171, 192,256,257,264,265,

163, 164, 167, 273,274,306,335,346

2 1 0 , 227, 288, Tucker, Ruth 369

347,371 Tyler, John 110

speaking in tongues 307, 372

spiritual gifts 175, 180, 373

u
union with Christ .43, 64, 302, 304,
spiritual maturity 83, 198, 263
305,315,330
Sprinkle, Preston 345
unity of the church .49, 59, 6 1 , 99, 1 3 6
Spurgeon, C. H 182, 204, 239, 330, 3 3 1
universal church 32, 34, 43, 46, 58,
Stafford, Tim 12, 14
60, 64, 68, 69, 78,
Stark, Rodney 98-100, 1 1 9 , 268, 2 7 1

Stetzer, Ed 7 1 , 1 1 8 , 1 8 5 , 256, 267, 80,93,94,368

278, 279, 289, 344,

v
346-348, 3 5 1 ,
Van Gelder, Craig 58, 60, 6 1 , 64,
353,366,382
66,77,87
stewardship 1 8 1 , 287, 290, 358
Vaughan, John 167, 168
Stott, John 255
visible church 59, 62, 63, 80, 9 1 ,
Strauch, Alexander 194, 197, 199,
105, 107, 1 1 2 , 299
208,247
Volf, Miroslav 7 1 , 154, 282, 283, 373
Strong, A. H 109, 146, 147,

168, 210, 2 1 1 , w
299,327,330,335 Waldron, Samuel 157, 194, 246

styles of worship 258, 278 Walls, Andrew .368

398 SUBJECT I N D E X

Warren, Rick 33, 124, 1 3 8 , 196, Wilson, Jonathan 68

252-255,260-262, Winter, Ralph 287, 370, 378

270,271,278-280, witness 26, 83, 124, 1 3 5 , 136, 163,

288, 339, 353, 355, 252,274,304,317,344

356,363,382
Wolfe, Alan 82, 349
Wells, David 290
work of the church 79
Wheaton College 15, 2 1 , 27, 60, 76, 78,
worship of God 270, 279
86, 1 2 3 - 1 2 5 , 1 3 5 , 139,
Wright, Stuart 1 3 1 , 266, 302,
1 4 1 , 1 5 8 , 173, 174, 179,
307,351,352
196, 1 9 9 , 2 5 4 , 3 1 1 , 3 3 8 ,
y
351,358,361,362,382
Yoder, John 97
White, James 209
youth 60, 203, 2 1 5 , 228,
White, Thomas 2 1 , 78, 123, 357, 358
242,243,300
Willow Creek Association 279, 280

Wills, Greg 1 1 5 , 122, 124, 1 4 1 , 169, 190, z

208,210,246,327,328,331 Zwingli, Huldrych 70, 92, 100, 275,

Wilson, G. Todd 168, 267, 268, 294, 3 1 6 307,308,321