Below is a copy of the article I wrote for our monthly newsletter…
Membership, a Horrible Word for an Important Concept
Let me be clear: I do not like the term “membership” when used in reference to churches. Of course, I cannot do anything about it, it is the term the Book of Church Order uses, and it has become such a part of our culture that we’re probably past the point of being able to change it. Regardless, I truly believe it to be an awful word for the concept it’s intended to express.
My dissatisfaction with the use of the word “member” is a response to the fact that it is a term typically used to indicate one’s privileges within an exclusive group like a club, lodge, society, or sorority. As wonderful as these kinds of groups can sometimes be, membership within them is primarily about privilege. Membership gives one the ability to demand something from the group. A member of a yacht club, for example, can expect the privilege of renting a slip or using the clubhouse; a member of a sorority can expect the privilege of attending private functions. While the specific requirements for membership in groups may vary, they are typically intended to draw a clear line between those who are “in” and those who do not belong.
Membership in the church is different. One does not “pledge” into the church nor pay yearly dues to belong. One need not be a member to be considered a “Christian;” on the other hand, neither does membership suggest the ability to expect any kind of eternal perks. Membership in the church is about a relationship with Christ and his people, and a commitment to God’s kingdom.
All of which raises the questions: What is membership? Why bother?
What is Church Membership?
We could say a lot about the theology of membership or the doctrine of ecclesiology, but in the end, it seems the question of what membership is might best be answered by looking at the vows people take when they “join.” Membership in the church demands a fourfold commitment: (1) a rejection of evil, (2) a profession of faith in Jesus, (3) a commitment to worship and service, and (4) an acceptance of the church’s guidance while living out a communal commitment to unity, purity, and peace. (To read the exact wording, see the RCA’s “Order for Profession of Faith.”)
Interestingly, none of these four commitments are merely matters of the past. Each of them are promises that must be renewed on a regular – perhaps daily – basis. In other words, church membership is not something we “did;” it is, rather, something we keep doing. As members of Christ’s church (both locally and globally), we daily recommit ourselves to reject evil. We daily recommit ourselves to Jesus’ lordship; we daily recommit ourselves to worship and service in the church, and we daily recommit ourselves to a life of unity, purity, and peace in loving community with one another.
Why Bother?
There are many reasons I believe church membership is a good thing. First and foremost, I believe it is both important and beneficial that we make these commitments publicly. Private commitments are wonderful, but our public commitments make greater demands on our integrity – when we publicly embrace the fourfold membership commitment, we give ourselves an extra incentive to remain faithful to them.
Secondly, our commitment to Christ and the church is reciprocated by a powerful promise offered in return: The church promises to “love, encourage, and support [us] by teaching the gospel of God’s love, by being an example of Christian faith and character, and by giving the strong support of God’s family in fellowship, prayer, and service.”
In a wonderfully circular way, our commitments become the support and encouragement other people need to be faithful, and their commitments become the support and encouragement we need.
It’s worth noting: we all fail. Each of us grows lax in our own commitments at times, and the church, at times, fails to adequately love, encourage and support us. Alexander Pope’s words are truly appropriate here: to err is human, to forgive is divine. Yes, we all fail, but divine forgiveness is granted freely to each of us (and through each of us to one another) in order that those failures would become increasingly temporary and decreasingly frequent.
If you are already a member of Pultneyville Reformed Church, how faithfully are you living into your membership commitments? If you are not yet a member, please consider joining us – it may be exactly the support you need. In either case, if you have any questions, give me a call, or drop me an e-mail; I’d love to talk with you!
Grace and peace,
`tim
I’ve recently recalled Martin Niemöller famous quote; it seems increasingly appro pro …
First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out — Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out — Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out — Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me — and there was no one left to speak for me.
Wise words from a pastor who dared speak out against the powers of his day.
Grace and peace,
`tim
Below is a copy of the article I wrote for our monthly newsletter. Thought I’d pass it on….
Lifestyle or Label?
Dallas Willard, one of the foremost authors on discipleship, opens the first chapter of his book entitled The Great Omission with these words:
The word “disciple” occurs 269 times in the New Testament. “Christian” is found three times and was first introduced to refer precisely to disciples of Jesus – in a situation where it was no longer possible to regard them as a sect of the Jews (Acts 11:26). The New Testament is a book about disciples, by disciples, and for disciples of Jesus Christ…. For at least several decades the churches of the Western world have not made discipleship a condition of being a Christian. One is not required to be, or to intend to be, a disciple in order to become Christian, and one may remain a Christian without any signs of progress toward or in discipleship. Contemporary American churches in particular do not require following Christ in his example, spirit, and teachings as a condition of membership – either of entering into or continuing in fellowship of a denomination or local church. I would be glad to learn of any exception ot this claim, but it would only serve to highlight its general validity and make the general rule more glaring. So far as the visible Christian institutions of our day are concerned, discipleship clearly is optional.
Ouch!
Willard’s argument is, at its most basic level, that the contemporary American church has abandoned the lifestyle of being a “follower of Christ” and settled for the label “Christian.” Willard isn’t the only person to recognize this, of course. As a matter of fact, I’d be surprised if most of us, in our most honest moments, didn’t admit to similar thoughts.
My best guess is that it goes back to the early American revivals. Somewhere amidst the several Great Awakenings, American Christians began believing that Christianity was predominantly about a “decision” or a “conversion.” We started to understand the faith as a religion based on “getting saved” or “going to heaven.” During this period, traveling preachers famously held revival meetings where dozens, sometimes hundreds, of people were led through a conversion (or REconversion) process. Whether they admitted it or not, numbers were the goal. The success of such meetings was (and continues to be) the quantity of people who claim they’ve made “a decision for Christ.”
The problem was, the local religious infrastructure to deal with all of these new converts was often either failing or nonexistent. Ministers (if there were any) weren’t prepared to deal with such an influx of so many people who knew so little about the faith, and congregations weren’t prepared to welcome these (often disturbingly familiar) people into their midst merely because they claimed to have had an experience of God’s grace.
Institutional failures were not the only problem or even, perhaps, the biggest problem. Even more destructive was the fact that people actually believed the preaching they heard at these revival meetings. Preachers told them they were saved; they were going to heaven; they didn’t have to worry about hell; God loved them. (All of which was true, of course!) However, these same preachers seldom bothered to teach their audiences that, in thankful response for their salvation, God expected discipleship.
Before long, Christianity became a religion primarily about conversion to a heavenly eternity rather than to an ongoing discipleship within God’s kingdom.
To be fair, even though we perfected “conversion-only” Christianity, we cannot claim to have invented it. It has been a problem since biblical times. The scandalously extreme nature of God’s grace has always been followed with the intense temptation to ignore the only appropriate human response to that free grace: faithfulness. Yet, the church has continued to fight that temptation diligently – or have we?
It is an important question. If Christianity is merely a religion of conversion – why bother with worship? Why have churches? Why bother raising our children in the faith? If Christianity is merely a religion intent on getting the hoards “saved,” why waste time and resources on those who have already converted or those who never will? The answer, of course, is that Christianity is not merely a conversion religion; it is a discipleship religion. To be “Christian” is to be a student (discipulus) of Christ’s teachings – one who increasingly learns how to live as Jesus lived and according to the priorities Jesus taught.
This is where the proverbial rubber hits the road. Discipleship is not accidental; it takes intent and conviction; it takes time and attention. That is what I’d like to leave you thinking about this month: Are you being intentional about discipleship?
I know time is limited and life is busy. You’ll notice I’m not suggesting you spend two hours in prayer and three hours reading the Bible each day or that we start a daily worship service at church (although, neither is historically unheard of!)
The question is far more basic than that: Are you intentional about learning how to live as Jesus lived? Are you a disciple?
If you’d like to talk about discipleship, or if you need help finding resources let me know! That’s what I’m here for!
Grace and Peace,
`tim
Today has been a remarkably long day at synod. It’s really the only day at this synod that is entirely in plenary. In other words, it’s the only day when the synod is meeting all day long as a huge group. Most of the sessions until this point have been smaller groups for helping delegates understand the issues or hone the recommendations that will be coming to the whole body. The small groups (aka “advisory groups”), don’t really do “real” business – but they make it possible for the synod to do its business wisely and in a well-informed way
Today’s business ranged from insurance and covenant of care issues to the situation in North Korea. The “Covenant of Care” is a sticky issue in the RCA. In essence, the “Covenant of Care” is the idea that we have the responsibility as a church to ensure ministers are cared for (via insurance). The RCA insurance plan is not a Cadillac plan and it is quite expensive. However, it is also a plan that covers ministers at all ages regardless of their pre-existing conditions. To accomplish such coverage is difficult, and the RCA has only managed to do that by mandating full participation in the insurance program (or allowing people to pay an opt-out fee ). The mandatory full-participation is not appreciated by all, and some ministers and churches have refused to either participate in the plan. Synod is trying to figure out how to reward classes with full participation and give clear help to classes whose churches are not complying with their commitments.
The synod also solicited nominations for Vice-President. Normally the process brings out 4 or 6 nominees. This year there were only two (there may have been others who removed their names from the list before the announcement, but that information is not public). What made this year’s nominees so different is that they both come from the Synod of Albany and they’re both women – one an elder and one a minister. There have, of course, been women presidents. There have also been both elder and minister presidents. But usually female-nominees are the minority – this year both fit that bill. It is also possible the synod will elect a female elder (a rare combination for the presidency in the RCA). To add interest (from my perspective), I know both nominees. One is a member of my current congregation; the other is a colleague I’ve worked with extensively over the years. The 2012 synod will be well-led either way.
Until later….
Grace and peace
`tim
I haven’t really had much free time over the past couple of days, but I did want to step back in and give another.
This morning I went to worship at Lester Reformed Church, my Grandma Hoogeveen’s church. I haven’t seen my grandma nor worshipped with that congregation in years. They’ve recently built a new facility which, although quite a bit smaller than I would have advised, is beautiful and welcoming. Talk about a morning – we accidently showed up the morning they spent celebrating a week of Vacation Bible School. It’s absolutely amazing how many children they have.
This evening I had dinner with my uncle Elliott (a delegate at Synod this year), my parents, aunt, a few cousins and my other grandma – hoofta! Everyone is well.
From a synod standpoint, it’s been a busy day, but I’d really like to go back a day and note the way synod handled the two recommendations I was most concerned about: R33 and R34. R33 attempted to institute a policy by which one classis could review the actions of another classis (on the issue of commissioned pastors), R34 would have made it possible for classes to ordain elders.
Both are deeply problematic to me. The first, because classes are not accountable to one another and I am at loathe to open the door for one classis to oversee another. For those of you who don’t understand RCA polity, let me explain. A classis is a regional body with the authority to open/close/etc. churches, ordain ministers and a variety of other very powerful privileges. Each of our 40-some classes are responsible solely to their regional synods (the next larger assembly). They are, however, not directly accountable to one another. Other than living in denominational covenant with one another, each is responsible for handling its own business as it sees fit (as long as it’s within the guidelines of the Book of Church Order. R33 would have changed that – problematic, at best.
The second, is an issue to me because the ordination of elders and deacons is solely the privilege of a local congregation. Classes simply do not have the right – it’s akin to separation of national vrs states’ rights in the United States government. The process of discerning the qualities of elders and deacons is done by a local congregation – and only by a local congregation. I don’t believe a classis has the ability (even if it was given the authority) to discern such things. I get the argument that this is for new church plants, but I don’t buy it. I think it’s a backwards way to make it possible for classes to ordain elders solely for the purpose of serving as commissioned pastors. (A topic I’ve written on before and may again….)
By God’s grace, both recommendations were well handled. R33 was revised to make the regional synod the oversight body – which it already was, so the autonomy of individual classes are protected. R34 was referred to the Commission on Theology. While it wasn’t the best possible option (to deny the recommendation outright), it does give me hope – perhaps the commission on theology will see how deeply inappropriate it is for a classis to ordain someone whom a local congregation may well have good reasons for not having ordained (maybe it will even consult the commission on church order – who really should be handling it).
I told several people that these were my two most concerning recommendations, so I thought I’d at least report what happened.
More tomorrow…..
Grace and peace,
`tim
Synod is now in to full swing and I had a few moments so I thought I’d touch bases and give a quick update.
The seminarian seminar (which I facilitate) started a day and a half before synod, during which we studied through the entire workbook, looked at every substantive recommendation, and welcomed a few guests who could give the seminarians a clearer glimpse into the business of the denomination. Our guests, thus far, were Kirsty Depree (who works with Discipleship), Rodger Price (who works with Revitalization) and Wes Granberg-Michaelson (the denomination’s General Secretary). Our guests, this year, were a bit more focused on the “revitalization” section of the denomination’s ministry (compared to last year, when I had more guests from the “multiplication” subgroup.)
The Belhar was declared and is now OFFICIALLY the RCA’s fourth standard! My only regret (and it’s not really a regret) is that, as a non-delegate, I didn’t get to personally vote on it.
Opening worship went well. It turned out longer than expected… a bit too long. The delegates didn’t really read the bulletin very well so the movement to communion was incredibly disorganized and I thought we were going to run out of bread (they ended up bringing more in!) but I’m pleased with how it went.
Both opportunities for new business went by without anything.
The General Secretary’s report included a few proposals. Huge proposals…. I’m a bit concerned about them – will try to write more later.
The President’s Report had 6 proposals…. Wow!
More later…
Grace and Peace,
`tim
The Reformed Church in America’s General Synod starts next week and I’ll be, once again, posting occasional updates and reflections (timer permitting) on my blog.
It’s shaping up to be a busy year for me but, of course, I’m looking forward to it.
If the rest of my blog isn’t of interest to you, you can reach “Synod 2010″ updates at:
http://synod.tenclay.org
Enjoy….
Grace and Peace,
`tim
No, believe it or not, I have not fallen off of the face of the earth. I am still alive. I am still upright taking in sustenance. I simply haven’t been blogging much lately. Sorry about that (for those few of you who actually read what I put up on here!)
We are doing well and recovering from the move. The trip out to Pultneyville took us almost exactly 12 hours. JJ had the girls in the car and I took Carina (the dog) with me in the van. The trip, although long, was relatively uneventful (exactly how a trip like that should be!) We arrived in Pultneyville around 6:30 and were warmly greeted by a group of people from our new congregation. Their hospitality even before we arrived has been unbelievably generous. I told someone the other day that I keep waiting for the shoe to drop – can a real people really be so kind?!
After a few nights of sleeping on the floor in our sleeping bags, we greeted the moving truck Wednesday morning and, by 12:30, everything was “moved in.” Back then, it all looked so organized and together — now, on the other hand, the whole house is filled with half-empty boxes as we’ve been searching for specific items and, at the same time, tried to find places for everything that we’ll be able to remember.
Sophia and Petra are starting to adjust. Petra has even slept through the night several times in the past week.
If you haven’t heard, my installation will be Saturday, May 22nd at 11:00 am. The installation service, in the Reformed Church, is the formal service that “officially” makes me the pastor here. It’s open to the public and, if you’re in the area, I’d love to have you attend!
In any case, someone reminded me this morning that I hadn’t posted anything since my arrival and I thought I’d better rectify that!
We’re well!
Grace and peace,
`tim
Yesterday was my last Sunday at Dunningville.
Wow, it seems like such a short sentence marking the end of 10 years of ministry here. It has been an interesting month, as I’ve worked on wrapping up my time at Dunningville Reformed and looking toward a new beginning in Pultneyville.
It seems natural, as something comes to an end, to look back and do some reflection, and I imagine there will be much of that in the coming months, but over the past weeks, my thoughts have focused on what I felt I wanted/needed to say before leaving. In seminary I was taught (and actually learned this particular lesson!) that one shouldn’t introduce something new in the final moments of a sermon. That advice seemed appropriate in the final weeks of ministry as well. If I haven’t said it in 10 year, it must not have been that important to me, right?! So, I’ve spent the last two weeks reviewing seven major themes that have underpinned my teaching and preaching over the past ten years. 10 years of teaching and preaching in 2 sermons!
Notably, I didn’t spend a lot of time talking about any of them; these are things I’ve taught and preached regularly – even more, they’ve been the explicit assumptions behind much of my teaching and preaching. The past two Sundays were only review.
These themes are, in many ways, my definition of “church” and my understanding of “Christian.” Too many people believe that a “church” is a merely a group of semi-like-minded individuals who happen to meet at the same place at the same time to reinforce their same-ness. That leads to the lived belief that “Christians” are simply those individuals who make up the in-group. While those definitions may make for a “nice” group of people who gather around preference, a church is something else.
Several online friends have asked about these past two sermons, so I thought I’d post my points here (sorry, no manuscript for these two Sundays). If you’d like to download the handout I gave everyone, you can do it here(.pdf).
Faithfulness:
Elders and Deacons:
Justice:
Integration:
The Word of God in Proclamation and Sacrament:
Mystical Union:
The Body of Christ:
The final note, of course, is that…
Grace and Peace,
`tim