Saturday, April 2, 2011
Concerning Church Covenants...
I'm always fascinated by the heavy emphasis many evangelicals put on written church covenants. I do see some practical value of having one (sort of a "written contract" with other believers - something that you can hold people to), but honestly I'm rather cautious about insisting upon something this serious that is not clearly defined for us in the NT. Don't get me wrong - I'm certainly not opposed to all use of non-scriptural practical elements (nursery, sound systems, offering bags/plates, air conditioning) in churches, but an actually written covenant (signed or not signed) seems to be in a different league than padded pews or visual aids, at least in my mind. And I'm not sure I can defend written church covenants on any grounds other than they sure are very practical... and I'm not real comfortable with that conclusion. What do you guys think about church covenants? The good, the bad, and the ugly...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I wrote a really long response explaining how written church covenants are actually a form of confessions and how ultimately they serve to make clear the teaching of Scripture and to hold people accountable to the teaching of Scripture. Unfortunately, when I hit "Publish", an error occurred and it was all lost. So there you go.
Hate when that happens JN.
I agree that many church creeds, confessions, and covenants can be helpful to clarify the Scriptures and the Christian faith. And I recognize the practical nature of them.
But helpful and practical are not the same a biblical. My concern with church covenants is more about the level of emphasis placed upon something that is not clearly taught in Scripture. They are often presented as something binding...
I think I can agree that it is possible to put too much emphasis on the covenant document itself. But I'm not sure we can put too much emphasis on the content of the covenant if the content is the teaching of the Scripture. And if the content of the covenant is the teaching of Scripture concerning church membership, then it is binding to that degree.
If we disfellowship someone for denying the Trinity, it is not mainly because they deny our confession, but because they are denying the Bible. By having a confession, however, no one can argue that they did not know our beliefs concerning this matter. Similarly, if we disfellowship someone for failing to attend church, it is not mainly because they are breaking our covenant, but because they are breaking the commands of Christ. Yet, by having a covenant, the person cannot argue that he did not know our church's belief on the matter. In this way confessions and covenants should serve the cause and authority of the Bible, not replace it or undermine it.
Does that make any sense?
Related question: do the elders of a church have the authority/liberty to insist upon anything practical that is not explicitly taught in the Scriptures? I think the answer to that is yes. Elders do NOT have the authority/liberty to insist upon any teaching not laid down in the Bible. But they do have the authority/liberty to insist upon practicalities that they believe will help the congregation. These include small things (insisting that the members enter the meeting place through one door and not another), bigger things (insisting that members use the communion elements provided rather than bringing their own from home), and even bigger things (insisting that members take a "New Members's Class", agree to a confession or covenant, etc.)
What do you think? Am I off base here?
Just JN and me so far, huh?
Yes, I do think elders can/should implement practical things to care for the congregation. And I do support membership classes that clearly describe the life of a particular local church.
It's the whole sign or at least solemnly commit yourself to this local church's written (binding) document that gives some hesitation, mostly because I can't see it modeled anywhere in the NT. But I do concede that it may have practical implications.
Also (just out of curiosity), have you ever seen some of the church covenants that include long lists of vices to avoid at all costs, including "no card playing" or "mixed bathing" (old slang for boys and girls swimming in the same pool)?
Post a Comment