The Scriptural Language of Membership
The language of “membership” (or more specifically “member”) is used in several places in the New Testament (primarily in Paul’s letters) to indicate our relationship to one another and to Christ:
For as in one body we have many members, and the members do not all have the same function, so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another. (Romans 12:4-5 ESV)
For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ. For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body – Jews or Greeks, slaves or free – and all were made to drink of one Spirit. For the body does not consist of one member but of many. (1 Corinthians 12:12-14 ESV. See also 1 Corinthians 12:18-27)
Therefore, having put away falsehood, let each one of you speak the truth with his neighbor, for we are members one of another. (Ephesians 4:25 ESV)
For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church, because we are members of his body. (Ephesians 5:29-30 ESV)
The misunderstanding in these passages, unfortunately, is that the English word “member” carries connotations that the Greek term translated “member” above does not carry. The Greek term translated “member” is closer to the English terms “limb” or “part”.
What’s the danger? Well, someone can become a “member” of a group by decision of either the individual or the group. However, a “limb” (i.e., arm or leg) does not decide to become part of a body, nor does a body decide that a “limb” is now part of it. The “limb” is part of the body by definition… identity.
In fact, this is exactly what Paul is teaching in the passages above. If you read the context, you’ll find that are “members” of one another – we do not have to choose to become “members” of one another. We find that God through his Spirit makes us “members” of one another, the group does not decide that someone may become a “member”. While this language of choosing and deciding is applicable for the English term “member”, it is not applicable in the Pauline usage of this concept.
Thus, we cannot translate the scriptural language of “members of one another” into an organizational concept of membership, in which either party can choose or decide to become a member of a group.
If God brings one of his children into my life, then we are automatically members of one another, we do not have to decide to become members of one another. Our relationship with one another is wrapped up in our identity as children of God and, therefore, we relate as brothers and sisters with one another, and are thus responsible for one another as family.
Unfortunately, too often, the scriptural language of “members of one another” is translated and interpreted as organizational membership. Thus, we choose who will be “members” with us, even though, according to Scripture, this is not our choice. We choose to be “members” with one person or group and choose NOT to be “members” with another person or group.
We need to understand that our organizational choices concerning “membership” bear no relationship to the scriptural idea of “members of one another”. As brothers and sisters in Christ, we are members of one another in Christ, and are thus responsible to live as family with one another.
We can’t choose otherwise.
All felt themselves an important part of being together
Art from “Church Task Force” left the following as a comment on my post “The weaker are indispensable“:
At what great cost have we gained so little. We have ruled out 95% of the life of a family in our formality and in our quest to keep up appearances that meet the world’s approval.
I think we need to look past sizing up the importance of contributions–and the methods of these contributions–based on how they make us appear in the eyes of the world (and the eyes of those who are careless in their journey). Is speaking the only way to function (must all be mouths)?
And we cannot do this without also considering the environment we craft and choose for our gathering. I mean both physically and the atmosphere we create by our level of formality. Just the idea that a meeting “starts†and now everyone must shut up, only 1 person may speak from here on, and everyone must give undivided attention, and no one must move or do anything without permission–oh how very weird for a family to act like this together! These have a great impact in shutting out the natural functions of these important members of His body.
Sure, at a family reunion, someone may ask for everyone’s attention for a few moments. But it would be rare. Most often, people cuddle up in groups and jabber away, sometimes dragging someone over to join in on some particular point. No one is excluded from functioning in the most natural ways.
Look around, and you will see love and tenderness being meted out generously. You will see the young caring for the old, the children laughing and playing with freedom and security, the men sometimes pulling aside, the women, too, but the gathering continues to flex and flow as everyone interacts, gives, receives, appreciates, enjoys, loves.
There was one family, but it was not a singular meeting in an artificial, formal manner, and so all contributed in constantly shifting collections of people. Think back and recall the family times together with uncles and aunts and nieces, cousins, and nephews and gramma and grampa. Remember the chaotic, ordered, joy of being together? Who has such thoughts of Sundays at 11 AM to noon?
In the end, everyone was fed a meal, everyone found acceptance, everyone contributed in many ways at various opportunities that presented themselves quite naturally throughout the time together. Service–caring for the needs of others–is highly valued and esteemed in these families. All felt themselves an important part of being together; all had a place. Even those unskilled in public oratory.
If the church is a family (and I think it is, not just metaphorically, but really), then shouldn’t we look and act like a family, even when we meet together? One of the great things about what Art said above is that it is often difficult to tell where he’s talking about a family reunion and where he’s talking about a church meeting.
Looking forward to a Super Bowl Party
I understand that we’ve been invited to a Super Bowl Party by some good friends this Sunday night. I’m really looking forward to this party. Actually, I look forward to any party involving our friends and family.
Yes, the Super Bowl will be on the television, and we’ll laugh at some of the commercials.
But, my main purpose in going to the Super Bowl Party has nothing to do with the football game or the commercials. Instead, I’m looking forward to building and deepening with relationships with people who are at the party.
I never know what will be discussed during a party like this… but there are always discipling relationships… both for me to help someone else grow in maturity in Christ and for someone else to help me grow. This is what I’m looking forward to the most!
The weaker are indispensable
I’ve been thinking about 1 Corinthians 12 again recently, especially this passage:
On the contrary, the parts of the body that seem to be weaker are indispensable, and on those parts of the body that we think less honorable we bestow the greater honor, and our unpresentable parts are treated with greater modesty, which our more presentable parts do not require. But God has so composed the body, giving greater honor to the part that lacked it, that there may be no division in the body, but that the members may have the same care for one another. (1 Corinthians 12:22-25 ESV)
Paul makes an extraordinary claim here in the context of spiritual gifts. Those people with gifts which seem weaker or less honorable are actually indispensable and worthy of greater honor.
Who are the people with “weaker” gifts, and how do we demonstrate that they are indispensable and worthy of greater honor?
The Lord’s table and humility
Two years ago, I wrote a post called “The Lord’s table and humility.” I’m still amazed when I read through the New Testament and see how much emphasis is placed on simply eating meals together. I still don’t understand it all. I also don’t understand how someone could take something that was once the center of fellowship among brothers and sisters and turn it into a reason for separation.
————————————————————-
As I’ve mentioned previously in the posts “A Spiritual Remembrance” and “The Lord’s Supper as Communion“, I’m reading through Understanding Four Views on the Lord’s Supper, edited by John H. Armstrong. The “Reformed View” of the Lord’s Supper is presented by I. John Hesselink.
While there is much that I would agree with in Hesselink’s presentation, I would disagree with some of his conclusions as well. (Interesting, since I could say the same thing about Moore’s presentation of the “Baptist View” of the Lord’s Supper.) However, I was very encouraged by one part of Hesselink’s presentation. In these paragraphs, he quotes John Calvin as Calvin considers the “secret”, “mystery”, and “wonder” that we call the Lord’s Supper:
I urge my readers not to confine their mental interests within these too narrow limits, but to strive to rise much higher than I can lead them. For, whenever this matter is discussed, when I have tried to say all, I feel that I have as yet said little in proportion to its worth. And although my mind can think beyond what my tongue can utter, yet even my mind is conquered and overwhelmed by the greatness of the thing. Therefore, nothing remains but to break forth in wonder at this mystery, which plainly neither the mind is able to conceive nor the tongue to express (Inst. IV.17.7).
Hesselink then comments on the quote above by John Calvin:
Since this heavenly mystery is beyond comprehension but is at the same time such a precious gift of God’s generosity and kindness, our proper response should not be frustration because of our inability to understand the mysteries of the sacrament, but rather gratitude and a reverent openness to what God would give us through it. We should emulate the spirit of Calvin, who was not “ashamed to confess” that the nature of Christ’s presence in the Supper is “a secret too lofty for either my mind to comprehend or my words to declare.” In short, he concludes, “I rather experience than understand it” (Inst. IV.17.32).
After years and years of battles with words and swords concerning “the nature of Christ’s presence in the Supper”, it is encouraging to read these words of Calvin and Hesselink. Calvin held very strongly to his convictions concerning the Lord’s Supper, and yet he was able to voice (at least) his inability to understand the mystery and wonder of the Supper. Perhaps this is a good starting place for those who disagree about “the nature of Christ’s presence in the Supper”.
I’ve found that most disagreements concerning the Lord’s Supper do not begin with Scripture. Instead, they begin with someone’s interpretation of Scripture – whether a patristic writer, or a reformation writer, or a modern day writer. Those who hold to certain views of the Lord’s Supper defend their favorite authors. In the meantime, they often ridicule (at best) or condemn (at worst) those who disagree with their favorite author. Thus, the common table of the Lord becomes a shouting match or even an ultimate fighting arena for those who hold different interpretations of the Supper itself. These fights – with words or with swords – end up dividing what Christ brings together.
However, if we can approach the table with humility – holding to our convictions and yet admitting that our convictions may be wrong – we will find that the table ceases to be a weapon and becomes the communion for which it was intended. We may find that we can stop dividing over Paul, Apollos, Cephas, Augustine, Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, et. al. and instead find common grace, mercy, and forgiveness in Jesus Christ. Of course, that means that we will have to admit that we (and our favorite interpretation and author) may be wrong. We also have to admit that we can learn from other followers of Jesus Christ who come to the table from different perspectives and hermeneutical traditions.
As long as we try to find unity in the writings and interpretations of men, we will only find factions and divisions. We will only find unity in the person of Jesus Christ. That unity may display itself more when we stop trying to prove ourselves right, and instead use the freedom that we have in Christ to serve others – even those who disagree with us about the table of the Lord.
At the table, the Lord lowered himself to the position of a slave and washed the feet of his followers. Those disciples did not understand him completely. Peter would soon deny him. Yet, Jesus served them. May we follow his humble example.
Yours is but a part of the whole
Please remember: though you receive the life of God personally, yet the life you receive belongs to tens of thousands of the children of God; yours is but a part of the whole. The very nature of your new life is not independence – it requires you to fellowship with the rest of the brethren. (Watchman Nee, Assembling Together, New York: Christian Fellowship Publishers, 1973, p. 4)
Don’t get caught up on the “tens of thousands of others”… the new life you receive from God belongs to those around you, to those that God brings you into contact with every day. God gives you a new life that you can give away.
Still too private, but still growing
Just over a week ago, something happened that was very disheartening to me personally. This thing that happened did not directly affect anyone else, nor did it directly affect the church. But it did affect others, even if they didn’t realize.
Although I’m learning and writing about community and fellowship and sharing and living life together, I found myself keeping this discouragement to myself. Why? Because this is my natural way of protecting myself and others.
However, I did share my pain with a few people… not enough people… not the church… but a few people. Looking back, I know that I should have told more people about this discouragement. It would have been better for me and it would have been better for them. But, I didn’t do that.
In many ways, I’m still too private of a person, even though I “know” the importance of sharing life together – all of life. But, I am growing in this area. I don’t know what will happen the next time something painful happens to me… but I pray that I keep growing.
The church and loneliness
There is a very good, thought-provoking post at Communitas Collective called “The Loneliness of Church.” The author has noticed something important:
My family and I were part of a large church that had many activities and ministries. I jumped in the swirl and began to form relationships with others who were involved in the same things as me. We enjoyed each other, experienced intense spiritual moments together, spoke the same language, voiced the same longings. All the things that make up friendship. Except for one detail; our involvement was limited to a church building and a church ministry. Most of my church friends, probably 99 percent, had never been to my home nor I to theirs. The people I would pray with and cry with and have spiritual intimacy with did not know my children’s names or know that I am an avid rose gardener with over 20 rose bushes in my backyard.
It was like an illusion, the illusion of friendship and the illusion of community.
Yep. Busy-ness and projects can create the illusion of friendship and community. But, it could be just an illusion.
How can we tell? What happens when the project ends? What happens with the tasks are complete? Is there still a relationships and a desire (that is acted upon) to spend time together? No… then it was an illusion.
This illusion can cause the busiest, most engaged, most assimilated people within the church actually live a lonely life.
Relationships and Ministry
Three years ago, I wrote a post called “Relationships and Ministry.” I think this post goes well with my focus on edification this week. By the way, the young man in my story below did find a group of believers to spend more time with, and we also managed to maintain contact and fellowship with him. He moved out of state not too long ago, and we still keep up with him and see him from time to time.
——————————————
A young man who is a part of our fellowship recently told me that he was having trouble building relationships. He lives about 30 minutes away from others in our fellowship. Several of us suggested that he look for a group of believers who live closer to him.
Why would we do that? Do we want to break fellowship with him? Absolutely not! And, we are not breaking fellowship with him at all. Don’t we care about growing the church? Certainly! But, we recognize that we will not grow the church. Only Christ will grow the church. Why would we suggest that someone meet with other believers?
First, we recognize that the Christian life is designed by God to be lived in fellowship with other believers. This cannot happen for this young man if he only meets with his Christian brothers and sisters for a couple of hours on Sunday. This is not fellowship… this is attendance. There is a difference. We desire more for this young man and for all brothers and sisters in Christ. We desire to see all believers developing real relationships (maturing relationships) with other believers.
So, I saw this young man a couple of days ago. He has had a great time getting to know some Christian men who live near him. Besides spending time with them, he has also started ministering to his community with them. They are playing basketball at a local partk, getting to know some of the other young men there, and sharing Scripture with them.
What a joy to see real ministry (both to the church and to those outside the church) growing out of fellowship with other believers!
We’ve come a long way baby
Recently, I was talking with some brothers who are part of Messiah Baptist Church. If you didn’t know, I’m one of the elders (pastors, if you prefer) of this group of believers. We’ve been meeting together for several years now, and our meetings and our interactions today look much different than they did when we first started meeting together.
As we talked about this, I told the guys that it was exciting to see what had happened in the last few years. If someone had asked me then what I would want the church to “look like” today, I probably would have described some things that are happening now, and other things that are not happening now.
But, “back then”, I decided not to push my agenda, even if some wanted me to push – and as tempting as that was. Instead, I taught and modeled and served and let God do the work of changing people. I didn’t want this to be my church.
I told my brothers that I think God has done a better job of growing his church than I would have done growing my church.