Concern for friends - valid or not?

[WrittenFromUtopia]

I alluded to this dilemma in a previous thread.

I have 2 roommates and another aquaintance who are attending (they don't have membership) an independent calvinistic Baptist gathering outside of Louisville. The gathering was began by a man (approx. 27 years old I believe) who has never completed Seminary and has never been ordained by any Ecclesiastical body (not even an individual church, as far as I know, not that this would make any difference).

This gathering, as far as I'm concerned, is not a real church because:

1. No lawfully ordained ministers to oversight the congregation, administer the sacraments, etc.
2. No accountability to any other church or body of belielvers.
3. No membership system of any kind.
4. No confession of faith or statement of beliefs.

I realize some of us on here may disagree with these qualms, but even most of the Baptists and Baptist ministers on this board are at least part of a federation or denomination of believers of like mind, confess their faith, and have been - for those who are ministers, such as Pastor Way? - been ordained by a valid Ecclesiastical body, I would assume and hope.

Regardless, for those who understand the Jus Divinum of Christ's Church and the importance of at least a semblance of Biblical polity, how do I approach this situation both respectfully and Biblically?

Do I approach my friends, who love this church and their 'pastor,' with my concerns? What do I tell them?

Are my concerns valid? Should this gathering be considered a valid Church?



[Edited on 10-2-2005 by WrittenFromUtopia]

[edited to de-inflame thread title]

[Edited on 10-3-05 by pastorway]

 

[bond-servant]

I'll set back and let more qualified people than I answer the bulk of this.

But from the personal experience of a good friend of mine, please know that if they have no confession or statement of belief, then they have *nothing* binding them. One has quite a fertile setting to begin a cult.

 

[Herald]

Originally posted by WrittenFromUtopia
I alluded to this dilemma in a previous thread.

I have 2 roommates and another aquaintance who are attending (they don't have membership) an independent calvinistic Baptist gathering outside of Louisville. The gathering was began by a man (approx. 27 years old I believe) who has never completed Seminary and has never been ordained by any Ecclesiastical body (not even an individual church, as far as I know, not that this would make any difference).

This gathering, as far as I'm concerned, is not a real church because:

1. No lawfully ordained ministers to oversight the congregation, administer the sacraments, etc.
2. No accountability to any other church or body of belielvers.
3. No membership system of any kind.
4. No confession of faith or statement of beliefs.

I realize some of us on here may disagree with these qualms, but even most of the Baptists and Baptist ministers on this board are at least part of a federation or denomination of believers of like mind, confess their faith, and have been - for those who are ministers, such as Pastor Way? - been ordained by a valid Ecclesiastical body, I would assume and hope.

Regardless, for those who understand the Jus Divinum of Christ's Church and the importance of at least a semblance of Biblical polity, how do I approach this situation both respectfully and Biblically?

Do I approach my friends, who love this church and their 'pastor,' with my concerns? What do I tell them?

Are my concerns valid? Should this gathering be considered a valid Church?



[Edited on 10-2-2005 by WrittenFromUtopia]

Gabriel,

I have a problem with your post on a number of fronts.

1. Have you ever been to the church? Do you know this information first-hand?
2. I am not sure that you understand Baptist ecclesiology. Baptist churches are fiercely independent (I alluded to this in another thread). Some are members of like-minded organizations (SBC, CBA, ABA, GARB etc.), many are not.
3. Lawfully ordained by who? Baptist churches commonly ordain their own. I know this may cause a Presbyterians skin to crawl, but those are the facts.
4. Accountability is usually within the church. Many Baptist church officers answer to each other and to the church body as a whole. Many of the more common Baptist associations do not excercise authority over individual churches. As such, the accountability of associations is limited.
5. You state there is no membership system of any kind. Do you know this for a fact? Have you been there? Have you read any writings from the pastor?
6. You also say there is no confession of faith or statement of beliefs. Again...do you know this for a fact?

Now...this being said...I am not defending this supposed church. There are many quacks in the world and I would not be shocked if a new self-appointed prophet appeared on the scene. My counsel is to know these things for certain before accusing. We are all capable of being wrong (I am an expert in that area). If you knew these things for a fact, then I would certainly speak with your roomies and share with them your concern based on scripture.

 

[WrittenFromUtopia]

Originally posted by BaptistInCrisis
Gabriel,

I have a problem with your post on a number of fronts.

1. Have you ever been to the church? Do you know this information first-hand?

I have been to a Bible study of theirs before. I know this information for a fact, first-hand.

2. I am not sure that you understand Baptist ecclesiology. Baptist churches are fiercely independent (I alluded to this in another thread). Some are members of like-minded organizations (SBC, CBA, ABA, GARB etc.), many are not.

I find that un-Biblical and schismatic. I realize many will disagree, but I don't really mind.

3. Lawfully ordained by who? Baptist churches commonly ordain their own. I know this may cause a Presbyterians skin to crawl, but those are the facts.

By the Church. By anyone. This man was not even ordained by a local congregation, if that is even possible Scripturally speaking (and I'm sure we can disagree on this point).

4. Accountability is usually within the church. Many Baptist church officers answer to each other and to the church body as a whole. Many of the more common Baptist associations do not excercise authority over individual churches. As such, the accountability of associations is limited.

This is another point where we disagree, I'm certain.

5. You state there is no membership system of any kind. Do you know this for a fact? Have you been there? Have you read any writings from the pastor?

I know this for a fact because they have told me this themselves.

6. You also say there is no confession of faith or statement of beliefs. Again...do you know this for a fact?

Ditto to the above reply.

 

[WrittenFromUtopia]

From the Westminster Standards:

Touching the Power of Ordination.
ORDINATION is the act of a presbytery.

The power of ordering the whole work of ordination is in the whole presbytery, which, when it is over more congregations than one, whether these congregations be fixed or not fixed, in regard of officers or members, it is indifferent as to the point of ordination.

It is very requisite, that no single congregation, that can conveniently associate, do assume to itself all and sole power in ordination:
1. Because there is no example in scripture that any single congregation, which might conveniently associate, did assume to itself all and sole power in ordination; neither is there any rule which may warrant such a practice.
2. Because there is in scripture example of an ordination in a presbytery over divers congregations; as in the church of Jerusalem, where were many congregations: these many congregations were under one presbytery , and this presbytery did ordain.

The preaching presbyters orderly associated, either in cities or neighbouring villages, are those to whom the imposition of hands doth appertain, for those congregations within their bounds respectively.

 

[Scott Bushey]

Gabriel,
If what you convey is fact, then your concern is valid as well as your charge.

What to tell your friends? Do they respect you and trust in your judgment? Are they biblical students at the same institution as you? The fact that they are involved in such a situation shows their lack of knowledge in Gods word. You might consider starting small. Keep it simple. Don't try to build Rome in a day. Too much information will only cause a brain fart.

 

[WrittenFromUtopia]

Originally posted by Scott Bushey
Gabriel,
If what you convey is fact, then your concern is valid as well as your charge.

What to tell your friends? Do they respect you and trust in your judgment? Are they biblical students at the same institution as you? The fact that they are involved in such a situation shows their lack of knowledge in Gods word. You might consider starting small. Keep it simple. Don't try to build Rome in a day. Too much information will only cause a brain fart.

A lot of the problem seems to stem from the fact that, as of recently, they all have denounced the study of theology and doctrine as useless ... along with everything else in the world. Everything we do is pointless and fruitless to them. They have built up a false sense of piety, in my humble opinion, around this idea that the less you are involved in the world and things of the world, the more holy and connected to God you are (in my opinion, adding to the gospel of God's grace). However, some of these "things of the world" involve going to school, going to work, and enjoying anything else that God has given us which we are to exercise dominion over in the name of Christ and for God's glory. Furthermore, this piety does not seem to carry over - as it should - into how they treat others or their consistency in laying charges and judgments against others.

Anyway, they end up very arrogant towards me, especially considering I'm a presbyterian and reformed, as I have this wacky belief that God's Word regulates how He is to be approached, served, and worshipped...

All of that to say this: They do not seem to believe God's Word has much if anything to say about proper worship, ecclesiology, etc. This, I believe, is a big part of the problem.

I'm all for someone wanting to be immersed in God's Word and be close to Him in a spiritual walk as they seem to desire - however, you cannot know how this is done without studying His Word in a way so as to learn theological and doctrinal truths from it, along with practical application. You cannot go straight to application if you don't understand properly how or what to apply! You can't desire to "just worship and serve the Lord" if you don't know what worship is! You can't "go to church" unless you know what a Church is! I hope you see my point, as I'm trying to be as vague and non-slanderous as possible.

I need help in knowing what to do, if I should do anything, and where to start.

 

[Herald]

Gabriel -

I have chosen to ignore references to Baptist churches being schismatic. I understand that PCA churches hold to the WCF as their standard. I don't (although I find the WCF to be a wonderful confession). So your right. We are going to disagree. I took the term "schismatic" personally when I first was accepted on the board. Now I chalk it up to just one of those areas were Presbyterians and Baptists will agree to disagree. But we certainly can have unity on the many areas we do agree on...right?

I am happy to hear that you have knowledge of these facts first hand (re: the church your friends are attending). There are many of these churches around. If everything you say is accurate then I would heed Scott's counsel. Pray that the Lord will give you favor with your friends and that they may be lead to a fellowship that is faithful to scripture.

 

[Larry Hughes]

Gabriel,

I'd say this much, no church government form garauntees the true doctrine nor true Gospel. History has proven this with EVERY church government form set forth. My wife comes from strongly various baptistic backgrounds (some I'd never heard of before) and every tom, dick and harry with nothing more than a feeling and pronouncement that, "I've got the call", or "he's got the call" pops up like weeds in her home region. I endured many of these "called" preachers when we first met and they were nothing more than babbling idiots, and I'm deadly serious. But its not just a baptist issue for all denominations have fallen pray to legalism, pietism and man's religion. Finney, the deceiver, originally was Presbyterian. The Lutheran's have kicked out their share of Gospel denying pietist and would admit it. The congregational church governments have their own special struggles unique to that form of government, but so do the others.



But I'd say it with this caveat though, if the church has a well thought out, perferablly old, confession (WCF, HB, AB, LBCF - not the SB Faith and Message, definitely), then at least the confession even if the pastor/leadership stray may afford a member some solace and peace in situations where another church membership is not viable.

One must discern EVERY man's doctrine and especially his Gospel no matter how he comes to be ordained. I don't mean out right disrespect, but if he preaches another Gospel, then his message is damned flat out no exceptions (if the angels of heaven and the Apostle himself put himself under this warning, then so do EVERY pastor/teacher/seminary leader that lives today, no such arrogance is afforded ANY man in ANY time period).

Doctrinal succession is more important than church government, yet I do think certain forms lend to a more unpredictability from church to church within a denomination.

Ldh

 

[SolaScriptura]

Originally posted by WrittenFromUtopia
Anyway, they end up very arrogant towards me...

Forgive me if I doubt that this is not reciprocated.

Using phrases like "unlawfully ordained" and "schismatic," even if you are sincere in your belief, are quite inflammatory and will not win you a hearing with them.

I realize these words may not sit well, but I have long noticed that you severelly lack in displaying Christian charity. As a result, perhaps you should begin by treating them respectfully as brothers and allowing your passion for your interpretation of the Standards to be tempered by the sobering realization that the Church is much bigger than those denominations that subscribe to the Reformed faith. On this Board, your language, tone and treatment of those with whom you disagree is often quite caustic. If you take that attitude with you out into a group of Christians with whom you disagree, I can all but promise that you will have ZERO postive impact, though you might walk away patting yourself on the back for being such a "good martyr" for the Reformed faith.

Maybe if you treat them with love and respect you may win a hearing with them.

Just my based upon reading and shaking my head at the spirit manifest in countless of your posts.

[Edited on 10-3-2005 by SolaScriptura]

 

[WrittenFromUtopia]

Originally posted by SolaScriptura

Originally posted by WrittenFromUtopia
Anyway, they end up very arrogant towards me...

Forgive me if I doubt that this is not reciprocated.

Using phrases like "unlawfully ordained" and "schismatic," even if you are sincere in your belief, are quite inflammatory and will not win you a hearing with them.

I realize these words may not sit well, but I have long noticed that you severelly lack in displaying Christian charity. As a result, perhaps you should begin by treating them respectfully as brothers and allowing your passion for your interpretation of the Standards to be tempered by the sobering realization that the Church is much bigger than those denominations that subscribe to the Reformed faith. On this Board, your language, tone and treatment of those with whom you disagree is often quite caustic. If you take that attitude with you out into a group of Christians with whom you disagree, I can all but promise that you will have ZERO postive impact, though you might walk away patting yourself on the back for being such a "good martyr" for the Reformed faith.

Maybe if you treat them with love and respect you may win a hearing with them.

Just my based upon reading and shaking my head at the spirit manifest in countless of your posts.

[Edited on 10-3-2005 by SolaScriptura]

Thanks for your concern, but I have in fact never addressed this issue with them nor discussed it in any capacity. In fact, I never approach them on their theological beliefs. They often make mentioning of mine as the butt of jokes in passing, and I simply ignore them or laugh along, depsite how it hurts me. You can believe what you want, based on an internet message board, about me, and hold this anger towards me in your heart. That is between you and the good Lord.

 

[pastorway]

Gabriel,

I do not want to downplay the seriousness of this situation. It is troublesome but I honestly do not have all the facts about this man who is pastoring this Baptist church. I cannot say if it is even a church or not. I think you would be wise to pray for your friends, fellowship with them as often as possible, and be careful not to judge them. I mean, where were any of us years ago? And where has the Lord brought us? How did He bring us to where we are? By faithful, constant, loving discipleship in the Word of God.

In light of this circumstance I do have a hypothetical question for you and for anyone else to answer:

If you had lived in the UK in the mid-1800s would you have attended Spurgeon's church? Do you ever read Spurgeon's sermons? Do you read his devotionals?

Why do I ask? Those of you who are familiar with Spurgeon know where I am headed. Spurgeon was called by God, affirmed to be the pastor of the church, a greatly gifted and annointed preacher, and all the while HE WAS NEVER ORDAINED by men to the ministry!

Ultimately, whatever ones view on church governemnt and authority, this is what we can be sure is true - if God has called you and appointed you (Eph 4:11) then no man can stand against you and succeed. And if God has NOT called you and appointed you then no credential from any church, any denomination, or any man can qualify you to minister in the Body of Christ.

As James White correctly notes (while defending the stance of a plurality of elders ruling in each independent local church) in his section of Perspectives on Church Government is this: the authority behind the office of an elder comes directly and only from Christ calling and appointing him to that office.

And He Himself gave some to be ..... pastors and teachers


Phillip

[Edited on 10-3-05 by pastorway]

 

[Herald]

Originally posted by pastorway
Gabriel,

I do not want to downplay the seriousness of this situation. It is troublesome but I honestly do not have all the facts about this man who is pastoring this Baptist church. I cannot say if it is even a church or not. I think you would be wise to pray for your friends, fellowship with them as often as possible, and be careful not to judge them. I mean, where were any of us years ago? And where has the Lord brought us? How did He bring us to where we are? By faithful, constant, loving discipleship in the Word of God.

In light of this circumstance I do have a hypothetical question for you and for anyone else to answer:

If you had lived in the UK in the mid-1800s would you have attended Spurgeon's church? Do you ever read Spurgeon's sermons? Do you read his devotionals?

Why do I ask? Those of you who are familiar with Spurgeon know where I am headed. Spurgeon was called by God, affirmed to be the pastor of the church, a greatly gifted and annointed preacher, and all the while HE WAS NEVER ORDAINED by men to the ministry!

Ultimately, whatever ones view on church governemnt and authority, this is what we can be sure is true - if God has called you and appointed you (Eph 4:11) then no man can stand against you and succeed. And if God has NOT called you and appointed you then no credential from any church, any denomination, or any man can qualify you to minister in the Body of Christ.

As James White correctly notes (while defending the stance of a plurality of elders ruling in each independent local church) in his section of Perspectives on Church Government is this: the authority behind the office of an elder comes directly and only from Christ calling and appointing him to that office.

And He Himself gave some to be ..... pastors and teachers


Phillip

[Edited on 10-3-05 by pastorway]

*bump*

 

[Puritanhead]

Jesus' disciples never completed seminary either. I have done tent preaching evangelism starting in my early twenties, and preached both topical and expoistory sermons in a pulpit and teached Sunday School without credentials. God willing, I would hope to get ordained one day and of course complete seminary. I have some growing to do spiritually as I prepare for it.

While I think sound church government is important, I went to house gatherings and Bible studies while in college, but never substituted it for church but rather made it supplementary. Christian fellowship does not have to always be under the auspices of some church government. I presume that you mentioned this only because they are making an attempt at maintaining a de facto church body with Sabbath services, etc. If this is not the case than I do not think there is much cause for complaint. Though, your concerns may be warranted, I would withhold judgment.

 

[Scott Bushey]

Originally posted by Puritanhead
Jesus' disciples never completed seminary either. I have done tent preaching evangelism starting in my early twenties, and preached both topical and expoistory sermons in a pulpit and teached Sunday School without credentials. God willing, I would hope to get ordained one day and of course complete seminary. I have some growing to do spiritually as I prepare for it.

While I think sound church government is important, I went to house gatherings and Bible studies while in college, but never substituted it for church but rather made it supplementary. Christian fellowship does not have to always be under the auspices of some church government. I presume that you mentioned this only because they are making an attempt at maintaining a de facto church body with Sabbath services, etc. If this is not the case than I do not think there is much cause for complaint. Though, your concerns may be warranted, I would withhold judgment.

Ryan,
I hate to disagree with you but Jesus' disciples did complete seminary training.

 

[SolaScriptura]

Originally posted by Scott Bushey

Originally posted by Puritanhead
Jesus' disciples never completed seminary either. I have done tent preaching evangelism starting in my early twenties, and preached both topical and expoistory sermons in a pulpit and teached Sunday School without credentials. God willing, I would hope to get ordained one day and of course complete seminary. I have some growing to do spiritually as I prepare for it.

While I think sound church government is important, I went to house gatherings and Bible studies while in college, but never substituted it for church but rather made it supplementary. Christian fellowship does not have to always be under the auspices of some church government. I presume that you mentioned this only because they are making an attempt at maintaining a de facto church body with Sabbath services, etc. If this is not the case than I do not think there is much cause for complaint. Though, your concerns may be warranted, I would withhold judgment.

Ryan,
I hate to disagree with you but Jesus' disciples did complete seminary training.

Yeah, they went to JU!

 

[Arch2k]

Originally posted by WrittenFromUtopia
1. No lawfully ordained ministers to oversight the congregation, administer the sacraments, etc.
2. No accountability to any other church or body of belielvers.
3. No membership system of any kind.
4. No confession of faith or statement of beliefs.

As to if this church is a true church or not:

1 - Lawfully ordained ministers are extremely important in the right governing of a church. That being said, lawfully ordained ministers are not part of the esse of the church, but the bene esse. I recommend reading (if you haven't already read it) Presbyterian Church Government NOT the Esse of the Church.

2 - A lack of accountability to other churches I would place in the same category as the lack of lawfully ordained ministers. While important in the preservation and health of the church, a church does not lose it's essence with the lack of this accountability.

3 - No membership system of any kind. This is troublesome to say the least. Church censures become difficult, but depending upon the particular circumstances, it is hard to judge. Some independent congregations seem to deny official membership with one breath, but in practice, keep membership by recording baptisms, etc. etc.

4 - No confession is the most difficult of the 4 you mention. If the congregation is arminian/Dispensational, that hacks at the very root of the gospel. No doubt, if a congregation does not have the un-adultrated gospel, it can hardly be called a true church. I do not know if this is the case in this particular situation, it very well may not be (but without a confession it is hard to say). If the church is true to the gospel however, we should be charitable in our judgment of the church.

In closing, I also believe the baptistic church to be schismatic from the one true church, but in that, we must be charitable as to the definition, and to what constitutes a true church. As you well know, this is defined by Calvin as 1)Preaching of the word (gospel specifically) 2)Administration of the sacraments, and 3) Church censures.

I would recommend highly reading Unity of the Church: The Sin of Schism, by John MacPherson. He does a great job of accounting our Scottish forefathers, and their judgements of what constitues a TRUE church, even in the light of schism and seperation.