Reformed theology has a "high view" of the visible and invisible church. What ought be required for church membership?

Thinking biblically, what ought be required (not necessarily what was required of you) to protect the peace and purity of Christ's Church?

Vote as many as you wish, please read qualifications carefully.

__________________
Scott
PCA
North Carolina


"Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering; (for he is faithful that promised)"
Hebrews 10:23

Add:

--knowledge of secret reformed handshake,

--trivia quiz about biography of Calvin,

--A brand on the backside with a capital C

--physical fitness test involving vigorous Calvin-sthenics

--Full beard and.or at least 4 kids.

--Knowing how to flash the Calvy gang symbols.

__________________
Pergamum


"If a commission by an earthly king is considered a honor, how can a commission by a Heavenly King be considered a sacrifice?"
-- David Livingstone

I voted for the mentoring with leadership selection. Why? Mentoring takes time and people get to know each other and what they believe and how they live out those beliefs. This will help the leadership ascertain if they have a baby, young man/woman or mature man/woman in Christ with them OR a goat (think they're a Cristian but deceived), pig (knows doctrine but their life is no different than the world) or wolf (agenda driven person looking for a following or sent to cause destruction). While no choice above is foolproof on its own, mentoring is a good filter to help maintain purity and unity.

__________________
Rich Koster
1689'er
Browns Mills NJ USA
Often Goofy Reformed Eccentric
Romans 7:14-25

-- 500 posts on PuritanBoard.

-- Thanked at least 100 times.

-- Thank others at least 100 times.

(I selected options 2, 4, 6, 14, 18, 20.)

__________________
T W Hopper
Member, Presbyterian Reformed Church
Currently between churches since PRC closed here - attending Crossroads Christian Church.
Canberra, Australia.

Wow, that's a pretty comprehensive list! Here's what the ARP Form of Gov't says with regard to membership vows:

__________________
Tim Phillips
Pastor, Midlane Park Presbyterian Church (ARP)
Louisville, KY
Husband of Scottish Lass
My Blog: Gairney Bridge
My Facebook/My Avatar

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

"Wherever the gospel is preached, it is as if God Himself came into the midst of us." ~ John Calvin

I would have voted for 'agreement with church statement of faith' rather than 'comprehensive knowledge of church standards etc'.

I'm looking for agreement with essential doctrine, not understanding of the minutiae of how an AGM is called, or how a deacon is ordained, and so forth.

__________________
Jonathan Hunt

Elder holding forth the word of life at:
Cheltenham Evangelical Free Church (Confessionally Based)
Cheltenham, Gloucestershire, United Kingdom

Logic is a systematic method of coming to the wrong conclusion with confidence.
-- Thomas Elsworth

Here are the requirements for membership in the RPCGA:

__________________
Josh Hicks, Chloë's Dad
Christ Covenant Reformed Presbyterian Church, RPCGA
Facebook - The Calvinist Vent
Board Rules - Signature Rules - Suggestion Box

It is God that multiplies our sorrows.... God, as a righteous Judge, does it, which ought to silence us under all our sorrows; as many as they are, we have deserved them all, and more: nay, God, as a tender Father, does it for our necessary correction, that we may be humbled for sin, and weaned from the world by all our sorrows; and the good we get by them, with the comfort we have under them, will abundantly balance our sorrows, how greatly soever they are multiplied. - Matthew Henry

AGM?

Associate GrandMother?
Articulate Greek Man?
Assistant Garbage Monitor?
Argumentative Gossip Machine?

__________________
Todd K. Pedlar
member, First Congregational Church, (CCCC) Cresco, IA
http://inprincipiodeus.solideogloria.com
http://puritanwisdom.blogspot.com

"As God did not at first choose you because you were high, He will not now forsake you because you are low."
John Flavel in Keeping the Heart



Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

I voted for 3,4,5,9,11,13,14,15,20.

__________________
Benjamin P. Glaser, M. Div, Licentiate, Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church
Member Fairmount ARP Church
Pittsburgh, PA

Deo Vindice

For "other" I'd give room for an infant of believing parents who are members of the Church.

Aggravating goober muncher

arthritic gorilla mauler

affectionate girly man

Quiz on the PB's "Prominent Personalities"

__________________
Norm
IA PCA

In love he predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will. Ephesians 1:4-5

Other: Be able to speak in a Scottish Accent.
Other (for PCA only): Agree to never bring up the idea of women deacons.

__________________
Steven J. Carr (Sven)
http://beholdingthebeauty.blogspot.com/
Eagan, MN
PCA
"Weak is the effort of my heart / And cold my warmest thought / But when I see thee as thou art / I'll praise thee as I ought."--John Newton
Trophy Wife/Arm Candy: Crystal Ann Children: Steven Jr. and Hannah Grace

By this is meant if the church leaders (e.g. elders) knew that, for example, the person was living in an adulterous relationship at the time they applied for church membership.

Would that person be accepted for membership as he was, persisting in that pattern, or must he be counseled that he does not have a credible profession of faith, and must change that pattern before being admitted to the visible church.

What is the difference between an examined and unexamined profession of faith? What sort of 'examination' are we talking about?

__________________
Jeremy Gage
First Baptist Church
Durham, NC

"No heart can conceive that treasury of mercies which lies in this one privilege, in having liberty and ability to approach unto God at all times, according to his mind and will." - John Owen

By "examined" the question means someone evaluates the basis upon which a person says they are a Christian.

This is as opposed to someone only saying they are a Christian, and being automatically accepted on that basis into membership.

In many reformed denominations, two church leaders (e.g. elders) would meet with the person and hear their story and try to understand the basis upon which they profess they are Christians. For example someone might say they are a Christian because their parents were, or because they thought they did good things more than bad things, etc.

And you are aware, Jeremy, 90% of American still say they are "Christians." I think we would all agree that is not possible, given the collective life witness reflected in our nation in this generation. Rather, that we see, in this generation, as in any other the "parable of the sower" being illustrated right before us- a proving out that many who say or think they are Christians have not been, in fact, miraculously changed first by God.

Would it be fair to say this examination operates more on the principle of finding positive evidence to support their claim ("Define your faith and show it to me by what you do"), rather than an investigation looking for something to disqualify them?

In practice, this is going to depend on the leadership in your local church.

The objective would be several, I would think. Two or more elders confirming that there is a credible profession of faith in the person's life.

I take it you understand this is not an examination of being "good enough" to get in but rather, whether there is credible evidence, confirmed in the mouth of two or three witnesses that God has saved an unworthy person for His Honor and Glory. Also, one can't claim that and persist in an open, known lifestyle pattern of sin. (One of our PCA vows is to walk an orderly (obedient) Christian life- not a perfect one, but not an open one of defiance of God, either).

Implicitly, that means that the person understands and is relying on the gospel (not a mere notion that they are a Christian or a good person), that they are not in an open pattern of sin (such as "living together" out of wedlock), that they have or will be baptized (and that they understand the basis for that).

In the PCA at least, there is no doctrinal examination except what is necessary to establish a credible profession of faith (e.g. understands justification by faith in Christ's righteousness alone, even if they don't know that terminology). There may be a bit about baptism. A new member only vows to learn the church's doctrine peaceably.

There are some reformed denominations that require more examination of the church's confessed doctrine (but that is not the focus of your question as it relates to "examined for a credible profession of faith.")

If the person is not ready for membership in the visible church, they can be encouraged to further study, mentoring, etc. It's also a time to learn of their needs (which can be relayed back to the Deacons).

Remember, in the end, reformed theology takes a "high view" of the Church. While it may be common in broadly evangelical circles to think the church is merely a loose association of consenting adults, Scripture teaches a view of some authority in the visible church. Not authority to determine salvation, God alone controls that, but authority by which to govern and discipline.

It's an institution governed by officers whom He appoints, where we learn to get along, be accountable, and submit to the brethren. Sin will happen, and God will cause scandalous sin to become known. He gives the church some authority, not to determine their salvation, but to discipline it for the peace and purity of His Church, and for His Honor and Glory.

Oh, that God's people, by His grace would come to understand that they will one day be judged by their behavior. (Yes, even Christian will be "judged"- this life is not a game centered on our egos or thoughts).

One way it happened for us was two elders visited us at home. They asked us each to share our testimony. They asked a few questions about our baptism, church past, etc. Then, we had a prayer time- I think they prayed for us, and we prayed for them.

For us, it really was more a warm time of fellowship.

I said a confession of faith and baptism. While I think other ideas are good practices for members to adhere to I really think that Acts 2:41 gives us the standard. After this any issues that arise doctrinally or in the lifestyle are to be handled as Church discipline issues.

__________________
Joseph F Scibbe
Chaplain Assistant
Chapel of Wings Ft Rucker Al
Ephesians 1:4-7, 1 Thessalonians 2:8, Romans 12:1-2
Titus 2:2 - But you, teach what accords with sound doctrine.

http://twitter.com/just_joe_scibbe

Do you mean by that that if God causes scandalous sin to become known beforehand to the church, that a person ought be admitted on basis of profession (saying only they are a Christian) and baptism?

My question understands "scandalous sin" to be a lifestyle pattern given over to sin that is open and God causes to become known to the church. It's not about incidental sin, but a lifestyle pattern that appears to be that of the ungodly (e.g. living in an adulterous relationship, even though the person may justify that in their own imagination).

__________________
Ben
Chaplain, US Army
Ft. Riley, KS
TE Ohio Valley Presbytery, PCA

The poll has closed.

There are a lot of different ideas about what biblically ought be required for church membership in order to protect the peace and purity of Christ's Church.

Combined, about 89% said baptism previous to membership was required, with 33% saying any nominal Christian church baptism was sufficient.

Large majorities, but not quite overwhelming majorities would require the following (69.5% said these):

1) Examined (credible) profession of faith
2) Public profession of faith (e.g. before the congregation)
3) Vow to submit to government and discipline of the church

Then slightly less (64.5%) said

1) Vow to walk an orderly (obedient) life in Christ

Then there is a big drop, with all the other choices around 54% or less, most below 30%

About 31% would require either comprehensive knowledge of the church's doctrine standards or both that knowledge and stated agreement with them before one could become a member.

-----Added 7/2/2009 at 09:30:04 EST-----

It seems to me the biblical guidance is not real specific or clear about the particulars of church membership. We can't be dogmatic about the particulars and would have to recognize the scriptures tend toward the simplicity of believing, baptizing and walking orderly lives, as befitting their profession:

It may be too much, because this is not clearly detailed in Scripture, but in the interest of protecting the church, her peace and purity and Christ's reputation, here's my list:

1) Examined (credible) profession of faith
2) Examination by elders, ordinarily in the home
3) Public profession of faith (e.g. before the congregation)
4) Baptism, previous by evangelical church only
5) Member class- More than 10 class sessions
6) Vow to walk an orderly (obedient) life in Christ
7) Vow to submit to government and discipline of the church
8) Vow to peaceably study the church's doctrine
9) Vote of church leaders (e.g. session) to admit
10) First, renounce by word and deed known disorderly (sin) life pattern
11) Vow to support church (prayers, efforts, tithes)

This is the way it mostly happened for me in the PCA, and I'm glad for it.

So you would baptise RC's?

__________________
Brad
Member- Eagle Heights PCA
Winchester, VA

Pro 16:33 The lot is cast into the lap; but the whole disposing thereof is of the LORD.

Isa 8:20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

After considering this biblically, I still can't get past the fact that a church that does not officially, at least, hold to the (biblical) gospel does not really have authority to perform a valid baptism. So, yes.

It seems to me the very object of baptism is salvation. If that (the gospel) is not only not held, but "anathemas" are pronounced upon it, then it would seem the authority of communion is not there.

__________________
Shane
1689 LBCF
Rosemont Baptist Church
Winston-Salem, NC
www.rosemontbaptist.com

"Tis not that I did choose thee, for Lord that could not be. This heart would still refuse thee, hadst thou not chosen me."

[quote=Scott1;646843]That sounds like it is heading toward baptismal regeneration. It's certainly farther than Westminster goes.

__________________
Edward
Deacon
PCA
Texas

[quote=Edward;646846]Not at all- the Westminster Divines did a great job of distinguishing between the sign and the "thing signified". It is not baptism regenerating.

(The context here, Edward, was whether to be a member one had to have baptism by an "evangelical" church beforehand or a merely "nominal" one (which would include Roman). The Roman churches teaches baptismal regeneration and that's not biblical either (along with officially denying the gospel).

The validity of Roman baptisms has been debated by better men than us.

PCA Historical Center: Index to the Position Papers of the Presbyterian Church in America

As to the WCF:

V. Although it is a great sin to contemn or neglect this ordinance, yet grace and salvation are not so inseparably annexed unto it, as that no person can be regenerated, or saved, without it: or, that all that are baptized are undoubtedly regenerated.

Yes, and for those following, the study report is well researched biblically and well written.

The report was 4 to 1 against the validity of Roman baptisms. What that means is that there was a "majority" report and "minority" report. What that means in our PCA polity is that there is not really an authoritative position on this in our denomination, even though an overwhelming majority on the committee were of one view. (This is a classic example of why a pre-determined divided committee on "women's issues" will not resolve anything or bring clarity in the PCA).

What this tells me, while I am inclined to believe biblically Roman baptisms are not valid baptisms, there really are two possible biblical views on this.

Incidentally, I have noted that some influential churches in our denomination take the position that while Roman baptisms are valid and administered but once, would be members who are uncomfortable with that may be "re"-baptized. I'm not necessarily commending that as the biblical practice, only reporting practice.

You may find helpful previous threads on this topic here on Puritan Board:
Is Roman Catholic Baptism valid?
Validity of Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Baptisms (this one had a poll also)