In Support of Open Membership

May 5, 2010

This post was first published at internetmonk.com. Feel free to comment here or join the already extensive discussion at internetmonk.com.

I find it difficult to belong. You would think it wouldn’t be that hard. I am a Christian who sees many positive things in many traditions. If feel quite comfortable in many types of church settings. I am however, in my core beliefs, an Evangelical.

The problem is that where I live, Evangelicals are in the minority. In my community of 27,000 there is one Evangelical church. I helped start it. It was a Pentecostal church, and although I am not Pentecostal I figured that having one Evangelical church in town was better than having no Evangelical church, and so I offered my help.

My wife and I served under two Pastors there. We led worship, served on the leadership team, served on the pastoral search committee, taught Sunday School, and organized outreaches and banquets. All the while I was dreading the time when the church would become large enough to receive its “organized” status. For when the church received this status, membership would have to be formalized. We didn’t qualify. Membership required agreement to the statement of faith, and we didn’t believe the Pentecostal teaching on tongues.

Eventually we felt God calling us away from this church community, and we had a very amicable parting of the ways. We ended up at a church in another community, which unfortunately due to competing visions within it’s elder’s board, ending up closing its doors three years later. As we looked at other churches, most had something in their statement of faith, that excluded us. They were either too Calvinist, or too dispensational, or too anti-Charismatic for us to fit.

After a long search we found a church in a third community. We quite love it, and I have some very good things to say about it. Again, we didn’t qualify for membership, this time because my wife’s mode of baptism differed slightly from theirs. Although we do not believe in rebaptism (especially for those who have already been baptized as believers), our desire to belong eventually became stronger that our distaste for rebaptism and my wife was rebaptized. We became members shortly afterwards.

Are there others like me who have difficulty belonging? Conversations with people at places like Internetmonk.com make me think that my experience is hardly unique. So here are some questions I would like us to consider:

1. Does requiring agreement with a statement of faith lead to increased fragmentation within the body of Christ?

2. Or are there essentials that need to be agreed upon no matter what in order for someone to be accepted as a member?

3. If Christ has accepted me as a member of his body, are there ways to make it easier for me to be accepted into a local church body?

4. Could we lessen the requirement of membership in many evangelical churches, so that prospective members do not have to give complete agreement to a statement of faith, but instead will agree to uphold it and not teach contrary to it?

5. Are there similar situations in other faith traditions? If so, are there resolution that have been seen to work?

6. Finally, what could you do in your church to help people in my situation become part of your congregation and membership?

I don’t have a problem with a church having a statement of faith. I feel it is a good tool to say “this is what we are about as a church.” Is it not possible to say that “We welcome those who have slightly differing viewpoints” as long as they agree to uphold and abide by the statement of faith”?

Your thoughts and comments are welcome.

3 Comments | church life, communion, Evangelical, statement of faith, theology, unity | Permalink
Posted by Eclectic Christian

Who are we excluding?

Feb 19, 2009

By Michael Bell

I am not sure whether to laugh or cry when I read this joke. It was overheard at Internet Monk and attributed by Ed to Emo Philips.

Once I saw this guy on a bridge about to jump. I said, “Don’t do it!” He said, “Nobody loves me.” I said, “God loves you. Do you believe in God?”

He said, “Yes.” I said, “Are you a Christian or a Jew?” He said, “A Christian.” I said, “Me, too! Protestant or Catholic?” He said, “Protestant.” I said, “Me, too! What franchise?” He said, “Baptist.” I said, “Me, too! Northern Baptist or Southern Baptist?” He said, “Northern Baptist.” I said, “Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist or Northern Liberal Baptist?”

He said, “Northern Conservative Baptist.” I said, “Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region, or Northern Conservative Baptist Eastern Region?” He said, “Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region.” I said, “Me, too!”

Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1879, or Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912?” He said, “Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912.” I said, “Die, heretic!” And I pushed him over.

This strongly reminds me of how much we quibble over the smallest things, and are not generous with those who differ slightly from what we believe. Pastors and denominational leaders, take a good look at your membership requirements. What is essential to the gospel? What other things can you put aside in order to fellowship with someone in your church and call him brother. Who are you excluding that Jesus has already included?

Your thoughts and comments are welcome.

7 Comments | division, Eclectic Christian, Gospel, Tolerance, unity | Permalink
Posted by Eclectic Christian

Alternatives to Division – #2: Using a Statement of Faith to Promote Unity

Jun 17, 2008

Most Evangelical Protestant churches have a Statement of Faith or a Statement of Belief. It generally serves two purposes. One, it says here is how we are the same as other Christians, and two, here is how we are different. Here are some thoughts about how it can be used to prevent division.

1. Including a phrase to promote unity:

In 1982 the North American Baptist Conference (NABC) put together a statement that would act as a guide for the whole denomination. One of the concepts that they struggled with was “inerrancy”. Many thought that the word inerrancy no longer communicated clearly, and that inerrancy meant so many different things to people that it was not worth having it in the statement of faith. One region of the conference felt strongly otherwise, and stated that if inerrancy was not included then they could no longer be part of the NABC. In the end, the conference acquiesced to the regions request. It was felt that having unity with the region was more important that dividing over a term which most felt they could affirm, albeit with different understandings of what that word meant.

2. Being deliberately vague to promote unity.

The Christian and Missionary Alliance in Canada made a recent change in their statement of faith to promote unity.  They removed the word “premillenial”.  Why?  I believe it was because enough Pastors and Leaders in the denomination could no longer in good faith affirm it. The denomination decided that it was more important to them to include these Pastors than it was to dogmatically insist that everyone have the same millennium view.

Read the rest of this entry »

4 Comments | division, spiritual gifts, statement of faith, unity | Permalink
Posted by Eclectic Christian

Alternatives to Division – #1: The Christian and Missionary Alliance and the Role of Women as Elders

Jun 13, 2008

Miriam CharterThis is the first in a series of posts on the theme “Alternatives to Division.” When facing discord and division in your church, what are some of the alternatives to simply dividing?

The first case study that I wanted to examine was that of the role of women as elders in the Christian and Missionary Alliance in Canada. This is an issue that was one of the key concerns of the denomination for 1982-2000, and one on which little agreement could be found.

The Christian and Missionary Alliance (C&MA) in Canada became independent from the U.S. body in 1981. While it adopted many of the US policies as its own, it was now a separate entity and responsible for making its own policies and decisions. One of the structures that was changed was moving from a two board system in the local church to a single elders board. Under the two board system, women often served on the Executive board, but not the Elders’ board. So under the single board system women were restricted from serving in leadership positions. Read the rest of this entry »

5 Comments | division, role of women, unity | Permalink
Posted by Eclectic Christian

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.