# Baptismal beliefs and their role in church membership, leadership, ministry, and serv



## anotherpilgrim (Jan 20, 2013)

Given recent events my church has been through, I'd really like some perspective from both sides of the baptism debate on, what should be done regarding someone who attends your church faithfully and would like to be involved in serving, and ministering, but disagrees with the church regarding this doctrine. Should such persons be allowed to serve? In the day-to-day runnings of the church, should they be allowed to have a leadership-type authority (not in the terms of elders or deacons). I'd appreciate any thoughts and any scriptures you all think may be pertinent to this issue.

Thanks!


----------



## Bill The Baptist (Jan 20, 2013)

It really depends on what type of government your church employs. If you have elders and deacons, and the elders are the ones who teach and make decisions while the deacons serve the congregation, then I see no problem with such a person being a deacon, but not an elder. It is essential for the health of your church that your elders are all in agreement on this issue. If your church has a confession of faith, it should be common practice that those who disagree on certain points agree not to teach otherwise or cause dissention. If this is the case and this person agrees to abide by this and is otherwise qualified, then there is no reason that this person cannot serve in some capacity other than as an elder.


----------



## Edward (Jan 20, 2013)

There's not enough information to provide a basis for a comment. It depends, in large part, upon the nature of the disagreement. 

If the dispute is over sprinkling or dunking, then an agreement to not teach or foment dissent on the issue might be sufficient to allow service to the church, even teaching, as to other issues. 

If it is a belief in baptismal regeneration, then it is just a symptom of a larger theological problem, and any leadership role should be withheld. 

But in the final balance, it is the existing church leadership that must make the decision, and if one is out of accord with the decision made, one must respond as appropriate.


----------



## Andres (Jan 20, 2013)

I concur with both Bill and Edward - it would depend on the role the person wanted to serve in and also on the belief/view they were in disagreement with. So essentially, the answer seems to be a case by case basis.


----------



## Herald (Jan 20, 2013)

Anish,

I am not sure what you mean by "serving and ministering". As a Baptist, you could not join our church is the absence of believers baptism. That alone would preclude you from serving as an elder or deacon.


----------



## Goodcheer68 (Jan 20, 2013)

I don't mean for this to sound harsh, but trying to keep a Biblical view on leadership in a Pentecostal church is not a battle worth fighting for, especially, when their whole ecclesiology is in shambles. For one, Pentecostal churches allow woman to preach and to be elders. I grew up in one and my mom is even an "elder". The other day, a pentecostal told me that they anointed their knee with oil.


----------



## Edward (Jan 20, 2013)

Goodcheer68 said:


> but trying to keep a Biblical view on leadership in a Pentecostal church is not a battle worth fighting for



Yes, that a whole 'nother  . Baptism might not be the biggest issue.


----------



## TylerRay (Jan 20, 2013)

anotherpilgrim said:


> In the day-to-day runnings of the church, should they be allowed to have a leadership-type authority (not in the terms of elders or deacons).



In Christ's church, those are the only offices.


----------



## johnny_come_lately (Jan 20, 2013)

Another Pilgrim,

I noted a few things about your question. The first is that you mention this person is "attending" the church. Are they a member, or merely going to the church and making no real commitment? If they're not a member, I'd say the first thing they should do if they want to be a part of serving and ministering in that flock is to join that flock. If they are a member, I'd ask if they took a vow like the below (thankfully posted up by EKSB SDG earlier today for easy copy/pasting)



> 4. Do you promise to submit in the Lord *to the teaching and government of this church* as being based upon the Scriptures and described in substance in the Constitution of the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America? Do you recognize your responsibility to work with others in the church and do you promise to support and encourage them in their service to the Lord? In case you should need correction in doctrine or life, do you promise to respect the authority and discipline of the church?



If they've taken such a vow and made any exceptions they might have known to the church leadership and potentially congregation, then they won't be using their differences to stir up controversy. If they were in a teaching position, I'd expect them to teach the church's stance on the issue. I was in this position with Exclusive Pslamody for a time in my church, until I finally accepted it. Inside the church, I'd discuss it with solid men in an attempt to get better understanding, but to the outside world, I held to the RPCNA's party line on the topic, since I had accepted the above vow. 

You also say "serving and ministering" which could be anything from helping to set up, to teaching Sabbath School, to counseling. If what you mean is on the end closer to the background work needed to make the church function, I wouldn't see there being any issue in a difference of beliefs. If, however, you mean teaching something, that'd be an issue for your session to decide and would depend on this person's willingness to abide by your church's position over their own ideas. I would say I know men who believe the opposite belief about baptism from the church that they're in who teach effectively as they do not put themselves in position to teach on that topic.


----------



## anotherpilgrim (Jan 20, 2013)

Hey everyone! Thanks for the responses! Let me clarify a few things here:
1. By attending I mean, in active attendance, wanting to commit to service, but can't be officially recognized as a 'member' because of a differing stand with the church on the teachings of baptism (person has biblical convictions about paedobaptism, church holds to immersion only credobaptism), and the church requires believers immersion baptism to be recognized as a 'member'.
2. Recognizes the reluctance of the church to use them in a teaching role, even if they have made clear they will not teach anything directly opposing the church's established doctrines, and respects it.
3. This person has abilities to serve in background-functions for the smooth running of the church, e.g. technical equipment operations and use, music ministry, working with children and sunday schools, etc.
4. Would having a leadership role in such functions (e.g. in charge of media equipment, use, and maintenance) be considered a position of a deacon?
5. To what extent, if the person is used in such a role, can the person have authority over another 'full member' of the church, e.g. if the person is in charge of media operations, to direct who handles the media equipment and how it is used during the services.


----------



## Edward (Jan 20, 2013)

TylerRay said:


> In Christ's church, those are the only offices.



In an ideal world, there would be identity between officers and leaders. But it is to ignore the reality of the fallen world to assert that the only leaders in the congregation are the ordained officers.


----------



## Jack K (Jan 20, 2013)

Well, I think you mostly need some thoughts from credobaptists, but my situation probably pertains...

I hold paedobaptist convictions but attend a Baptist church. Like the person you mention, I too am not elegible for membership while holding to my beliefs. In my church, there would be no problem with someone like me, supposing I was otherwise qualified and a man of godly character, serving in most of the ways you mentioned. In fact, I even teach in the church—mostly children, but that's because I'm particularly good with kids and not because teaching adults is considered off limits for me. I had extensive talks with the leadership before I began teaching. I would never teach anything that contradicted the church's faith statement (meaning I never teach that babies should be baptized). And sometimes I check with the pastor before teaching on certain topics, just to make sure he's okay with my approach. I do this even when I'm teaching kids. I'm careful and consciencious. In nearly seven years, we've never had a conflict over any of my teaching.

So I obviously think it can work if you have trustworthy people involved who respect each other's differences. I'd understand if a Baptist church decided to restrict me from teaching, but I'm appreciative that this one doesn't.

I don't think there's any reason to keep such a person from helping with techinal equipment or something like that, even if he's leading other volunteers. That doesn't make him a de facto deacon. It just means his gifts are being put to use. Sometimes there are people who aren't qualified to be officers in the church but have abilitiy to serve in roles of limited leadership, and it's wise of deacons to appoint such people to do those jobs. Also, among believers there ought not to be any rule that all full members are somehow considered higher than non-members and must never serve under a non-member's direction. We should be humble people. That sort of thing just shouldn't be a problem.

For what it's worth... in my last paedobaptist church a convinced credobaptist would have not only been allowed to serve in such ways but also would have been admitted to membership. If he proved himself trustworthy, he might also have been allowed to teach some things in some limited settings, with close supervision. He would not, of course, be able to serve as an officer.


----------



## johnny_come_lately (Jan 20, 2013)

AnotherPilgrim,

I'm not sure the right questions are being asked. That this person wants to serve is great, but I would say there's bigger problems if they cannot join this church and can never be a member of the body. Are there any reformed paedobaptist churches even remotely nearby (anything within an hour and a half is 'nearby') that they could join? Are they a member in good standing anywhere? Are they able to take communion with this body or does this church fence the table rigorously? 



anotherpilgrim said:


> 4. Would having a leadership role in such functions (e.g. in charge of media equipment, use, and maintenance) be considered a position of a deacon?



Whether or not a position is one that belongs to a Deacon I believe is something they should take up with their Deacon Board. That said, there's a big difference between the "leadership" of taking care of a particular thing in the church, and the leadership of the Diaconate. While Deacons are ultimately held responsible for the stability of the congregation's material assets and mercy ministry in the congregation and outside, there is no reason any particular role in the church couldn't be delegated. We are all deacons in Christ's church and those of us who are Deacons greatly appreciate those who recognize that and take it upon themselves to pitch in in such a manner. 

That said, it sounds like there's much more beneath the surface that should be taken care of by the church. I would highly recommend that if this person cannot join this church, that they seek an alternative. If no alternative exists, I would recommend they go to their Session and Deacon Board and ask these questions of the men who actually have insight into the local church's thoughts on the matter.


----------

