Your right…..you think the ones that have made an attempt to come in the first place would listen more readily. But, we must always remember, that sin so easily besets all of us and we tend to run from God instead of to Him. That is why it is ultimately most effective to keep the Gospel on the tip of the tongue.

If the pastors are truly preaching the Word (there are times when pastors do not do this and expect people to attend their churches anyway), then the best the faithful leadership can do for those that are not willing to fellowship or obey the ones that look out for their souls,…. is to remove them, ….since they have proved not to be part of your body.

Certainly there are implications, ….the ones that have been removed have some decisions to make. Either they will get mad and tell everyone in the world how horrible you are, or they will repent and return to the fellowship where they can edify the body of Christ. The nice thing about this situation is there is no mystery to the results and the leadership is being faithful to the body of Christ, especially if the leadership is prepared to be patient and continue to share the Gospel.

additionally,….if you do get a lot of grief from the individual, this is a perfect opportunity to pray for them and share the Gospel with them and watch God work. As Paul puts it….in season and out of season…it really doesn’t matter.

Finally, as the Pastors and Leadership consistently care for the flock and the flock learns the gentleness and patience demonstrated in the power of the Gospel,… the entire body is edified. Another thing that I try to keep in front of me….is that my goal is not to get them back into the quote “church”, but to love them and see that their relationship with their heavenly Father is well nourished…my objective is to edify them.

Pretty simple stuff, but effective.
Blessings,
Chris

What do you do in cases like this? What do you expect the “inactive” (since that is easier to identify clearly than “unregenerate) to do after you have gone over the Statement of Faith with them. You indicated that this could take some time–hours or weeks?

I really like details if I am going to try to decide what course of action to take. And I’m persistent.

Bennett

Bennett,…thanks for the response,….

Here is an example of what our church family does. We, the pastors and teachers, go to the families and teach them the covenant, or for us “Statement of Faith”. We do not require a signature, because it is incumbent upon the pastors to know if the information is getting across. The “going to them” is the key to understanding what church roll you really have. And then, once you find them, ….feed them. That was my point in the subsequent email.

If they refuse to be taught, then I believe it is appropriate to gently teach them the consequences of not obeying. (This may take some time). And also stressing to them that you are not putting them on a guilt trip…but simply bringing to their attention that God has rescued them from His wrath to come and as servants to the King we should and are commanded to love one another.

The main problem that I have experienced in the past is that there were a lot of leaders or teachers in the church that did not understand or could not explain the “doctrines”…..so trying to teach someone without prepared leaders, became an impossible task. Most leaders, pastors, deacons, etc. would rather send out letters, instead of meeting face to face. The face to face meeting, when done in love, is the greatest of all roll-calls, whether they come back to the church or not.

Writing a solid church covenant or “Statement of Faith” is a great place to start….

Just some thoughts,

Blessings,
Chris

Chris,
I’m on the policy committee of my church (and have been off and on for years)–and I am looking at this “legalistically.” If you are going to require the church rolls to be accurate (and I am not completely sure what that is) then you have to have a clearly stated way to do that–otherwise you won’t know what to do.

What I find when I ask the question is that we are all for “preventing inflated church rolls” but we have few clear and implementable ideas on how this should be accomplished.

There was a suggestion above that a new church covenant could be put together and then only the old members who signed the new covenant would be counted in the new official membership list. This would cull out any who just believe that Baptists don’t sign things–which might be desirable in some minds. It would cull out those who just are not willing to come up to church for anything–desirable in almost all minds.

I really don’t see that proper preaching (always a good idea) would help a whole lot with the active membership problem. After all, those who are the problem are not hearing the preaching.

Bennett Willis

I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom; Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.
(2Timothy 4:1-4)

Sometimes we as pastors like to think or hope that the sheep really respect the word, and the work of the pastor, and what we have to say, etc., ….but that is really not the mission of the pastor. The sheep need to “hear something”, but we are tempted to spend time trying to pragmatically discover who the real church is…. and make sure they comply or at least contribute.

The answer to a regenerate church membership is to “preach the word.” I think I hear what you are saying….. if people would just get involved and dig in, be disciplined, then they would see the benefits and blessings…… the church would be healthy. It always come full circle….the only healthy church is the one where the preaching is focused on the Gospel and doctrine is taught day by day.

Sometimes we tend to replace biblical doctrine with policy and compliance documents.

Blessings,
Chris

Bennett

You don’t seem very positive about churches taking action on a motion that passed unanimously. :)

Thanks for the suggestion. At least it does involve some sense of commitment. Do you have any information (preferably links) about some who have tried it?

Bennett Willis

One suggestion I’ve found that I really like came from John Hammett’s Biblical Foundations for Baptist Churches.

Our church covenant is the same one that many churches use, and some have on their walls. The suggestion was that the church (it’s active membership, anyway) works together to write a new covenant. Once complete, you notify all members by mail of the completion of the new covenant, and announce a date for a “signing ceremony” wherein everyone will sign their agreement to be bound by this new covenant. Inherent in this process would be the understanding that the membership will consist of those who have signed their agreement to be bound by the contents of the new covenant.

Sure, there are pitfalls in that approach, but it gives the opportunity to approach the process positively. The letter would talk about how the church would very much like to have everyone involved, and all would have opportunity to have input as to what the covenant says and doesn’t say. It’s all very congregational.

As to reports on the resolution, I’ll certainly be blogging about any of our churches that determine to move in this direction.

Bennett Willis