I wonder whether church's approach to evangelism is really one of purpose and function? The church's purpose is to worship God, a function of which is preaching the gospel.
Bill Brown has made an observation worth further reflection and that leads me to a text that might be relevant to our discussion regarding the church's corporate responsibility and possibly also the Christian's personal responsibility to communicate the gospel not merely in the corporate gatherings of the church but also outside those corporate gatherings to a lost and dying world. According to 1 Peter 2:9, the people of God are something in order that they might do something.But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special people, that [hopos = purpose] you may proclaim the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light.So God has granted the church privileged status in order that she might carry out a particular function. That function is described as "proclaiming the praises (or excellencies) of our Redeemer. The Greek verb translated "you may proclaim" is exangello. The basic meaning is to report, announce, declare. Calvin writes, "It behooves us to declare these excellencies not only by tongue, but also by our whole life" (Calvin's Commentaries on the NT, 12:266). According to John Brown, "Christians, as the called of God, are intended to show forth the excellencies of God, both passively and actively." "By your lips, by your lives ... honour Him who has called you ..." (Expository Discourses on First Peter, 317, 321). The addition of the preposition ex may convey the idea of declaring abroad. Edmond Hiebert argues that the verb "conveys the picture of a message being proclaimed to those outside what has taken place within. It indicates the evangelistic function of the church.... Both word and conduct are involved" (1 Peter, 144). The fact that Peter addresses the church both in corporate (e.g., "a spiritual house") and also in individual language (e.g., "living stones) would seem to suggest that the privileged responsibility has both a corporate and individual dimension.
It seems, from a perusal of certain other NT texts, that individual members of the church sensed this privilege and responsibility, and accordingly they engaged in evangelistic endeavor. For example, Saul's persecution of men and women in the church resulted not only in their dispersion but in their "publishing the good news [euangelizomenoi ton logon]" (Acts 8:4). Later, the now converted Saul praised the newly planted church in Thessalonica because "from [them] the word of the Lord has sounded forth [exechetai; from which we obtain the verb "to echo"] not only in Macedonia and Achaia but in every place." Indeed, the apostles boasts, "Your faith toward God has gone out, so that we do not need to say anything" (1 Thess. 1:8). I don't believe we can limit the Thessalonian witness merely to a godly lifestyle since a godly lifestyle has no meaning apart from a propositional interpretation of that lifestyle. Paul could only say, "We do not need to say anything," because the Thessalonians apparently had sufficiently communicated the word. While Paul may be using a little hyperbole here, it does seem to me that he's acknowledged and praised an active effort of evangelism on the part of these relatively new believers.
Of course, I do recognize the potential problem to which Bill and a few others have made reference. First, there are many individual members who are afraid to share the gospel. Second, to use Bill's words, "there are just as many who don't have a mastery of the message." I agree. Consequently, we need to be patient with the fearful just as Jesus was patient with his disciples. Nevertheless, in the end we must embolden them with the same words Jesus communicated to his disciples, "Do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. But rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell" (Matt. 10:28). Moreover, we need to do all we can to thoroughly ground our people in the faith so that each one can heed the words of Peter and "always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you" (1 Peter 3:15). Think also of the admonition Hebrew's author gives to certain members of the church:For though by this time you ought to be teachers [emphasis added], you need someone to teach you again the basic principles of God's revelation. You need milk, not solid food. or everyone who partakes only of milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness, for he is a babe. But solid food belongs to those who are of full age, that is, those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil [emphasis added] (Heb. 5:12-14).The implication of this text seems to be that individual believers ought to strive for doctrinal and practical maturity in order that they might communicate accurately the gospel to others. Certainly, of all believers those who are members of Reformed church and are indoctrinated with Reformed theology ought to be among the most qualified to communicate the gospel to the lost.
I conclusion, these are some passages in the NT that presently seem to me to give some warrant for laying a measure of evangelistic responsibility at the feet of the saints. Of course, I think it's also vital that we make appropriate qualifications. Not everyone is called to serve Christ as an ordained pastor or missionary. Nor does every Christian have the same measure of opportunities. Nor does every child of God possess the same level of doctrinal and practical maturity to effectively and accurately communicate the gospel. So the weight of responsibility upon each individual Christian will differ. Nevertheless, it does not appear wide the mark to conclude that the Scriptures do seem to give warrant for us in our confessions to affirm not only the church's responsibility to preach the gospel in the context of corporate worship and to commission church planters and missionaries to take the gospel to the nations but also the individual believer's responsibility to be salt and light (by life and lip) in the midst of a lost and perishing world.
Is 'proclaiming God's excellencies to the world' the same as 'evangelization'? I would agree that the former is everyone's duty (even the reprobate), but not the latter.
My concern is not whether all have 'mastery of the message' but whether they have the 'authority' to call men to repentance and faith. Rom 10 seems to me to teach that only those who have been 'sent' have such authority. In fact, many people in churches today are living such a sinful lifestyle that they might be in danger of profaning God's Holy name by evangelizing.
Also, how is a concern for the lost measured? Does Dr. Frame give us any guidance on how to judge between a true and a false concern? It all seems very vague to me whereas the Word and Sacrements are obvious.