percent agreement.
They’d Burn This Church to the Ground in California (With the Governor’s Blessing)
percent agreement.
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2017
- Messages
- 4,690
- Reaction score
- 1,820
- Points
- 113
Most churches I know of don't have anyone sign a pledge to follow the church covenant.
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2012
- Messages
- 9,659
- Reaction score
- 3,227
- Points
- 113
Same here. Of course, as Baptist Renegade alluded to in his earlier post, many church covenants are not up-to-date enough to deal with some of the recent LGBTQ ideologies and tactics so it would behoove churches to beef up their covenants. Having said that, if the covenant is sufficiently written to cover such things, then I don’t see a need to force members to sign their covenants, so long as they have given affirmative ascent to the ideas within the covenant as a condition of membership. In that case, anybody who would begin espousing or propagating LGBTQ teachings within the body, would justifiably be subject to church discipline proceedings.
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2017
- Messages
- 4,690
- Reaction score
- 1,820
- Points
- 113
I agree. I know our church's covenant needs to be updated.
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2012
- Messages
- 9,343
- Reaction score
- 1,340
- Points
- 113
No but there’s the assumption that you won’t violate the covenant. I’d sign ours if asked. I’d sign FBC’s if I were there. Signed or not it’s an agreement.
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2012
- Messages
- 9,343
- Reaction score
- 1,340
- Points
- 113
The ‘world’ objecting to this is totally understandable but truthfully most churches with a covenant simply have it as an ornament.
Wink wink, we don’t take it seriously and neither should you.
Wink wink, we don’t take it seriously and neither should you.
I don't think we really took the church covenants that seriously but probably high time we did! What we need to do though is make sure it covers EVERYTHING that truly matters (Doctrinal and moral issues) and leave off the things that do not. I know many Baptists have an absolute "Teetotaler" stance that most probably do not follow as well as things like dancing and attending the movie house. Stick to the things that truly matter and make it a prerequisite for Church membership and a matter for Church discipline if violated.
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2012
- Messages
- 11,696
- Reaction score
- 2,613
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
My church's statement of faith has one article with a footnote explaining that it represents the official position of the church, but they specifically don't require all members to be in agreement with it. (Not surprisingly, it's the one thing I didn't agree with and kept me from seeking membership for a number of years, until I just decided I wasn't going to quibble over literally four words.)
I infer from this that they do expect members to agree with the rest of it.
John MacArthur speaks of this and the "Statement of Faith" of Grace Community Church says "What we Teach" rather than "What we Believe." It is therefore the position of the Church eldership, not necessarily the position of Church membership so I would bet that everyone in a position at Grace Community would be required to in agreement but it would be understood that not everyone in the congregation is in 100% agreement.
RC Sproul speaks of this as well saying that all of the elders in his Church must adhere to and uphold the Westminster Confession of Faith but that no such expectation is placed upon the congregation.
I believe what is important is that the Church is able to stand firm on their position regarding traditional marriage. People in the congregation may disagree but they must be rendered powerless in their attempt to change the official Church position. I believe this would be consistent with counsel a Church would receive from organizations like the Christian Law Association and I am sure their staff is remaining quite busy regarding this matter.
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2017
- Messages
- 4,690
- Reaction score
- 1,820
- Points
- 113
I don't sign anything that has to do with religious organizations. I used to, but, then some turned out to be something they weren't showing they were. Many of these religious organizations are cultic in attitude and it's not until it's too late that many realize this. Agreement or not, I agree only with God on religious matters.
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2012
- Messages
- 9,343
- Reaction score
- 1,340
- Points
- 113
But if you ‘join a church’ you place yourself under their spiritual authority form which church discipline is derived. I’m sure that there are many things our church members would disagree on. Presumably Bible church doctrine is where the agreement is insisted. So if you join a church, sign or not, you affirm your agreement with such. If not, what’s the point?
I am under the authority of my pastor and elder board without signing any documents or covenents. We are in agreement on the major issues. If I or they should stray, there's attempts at restoration. If that doesn't work, I'm outta there.
I would say so long as the Church is adequately protected and is able to boldly stand and doctrinal and philosophical positions are clearly stated and not easily changed, then everything should be fine. Each congregation will have their own means to do so and I believe every Church should seek legal counsel to ensure their Church Constitution, Statement of Faith, and Church Covenant is adequate to protect the Congregation and its tangible assets.
As I said, it is far too easy in many Baptist Churches to have anyone come forward, make a "Profession" and get added to the membership rolls. Secondly, such Churches also fail to cull "Non-Attenders" from their rolls and you hear stories all the time of those on the membership who has not set foot in the Church in YEARS showing up at a business meeting with the intent to stir up trouble and oppose whatever is being proposed and you are obliged to put up with them because they are still officially an "Active Voting Member!" If Calvary Chapel has something in place to prevent such from happening then good for them!
Perhaps this Church has been guilty of such bad practices for years and now the pastoral leadership feels they have to take such drastic draconian measures in order to correct their trajectory?
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2012
- Messages
- 9,343
- Reaction score
- 1,340
- Points
- 113
I’m not sure of the recent history of this church although I attend a few of their Pastors Conference’s in the past.
My only point is that as an autonomous church they can do as they please. And the members can decide whether or not to comply.
Nice thing about that is when the ship sinks, the survivors can flee easily.
But I have a question regarding this. I know what I'm suggesting might sound pretty strong and maybe unloving but what do we do with 1 Cor 5. Forgive me as I put down the whole passage.
It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father's wife. 2And ye are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he that hath done this deed might be taken away from among you.
My comments: So fornication here means any kind sexual impurity. It says they should be taken away from them. I don't believe it means if someone merely fell into sin, felt sincerely bad about it and repented but it's talking about one's who made it an acceptable pattern in their life, not willing to change. Strange it says they were puffed up about it....meaning.....they were proud....but about what. I don't think it means they agreed with the ones so sinning but rather they prided themselves that they were a loving, kind church not knowing true love would have removed them. Not doing so they normalized immoral acts as being...well....it's OK and members would end up just thinking well they're nice people. By normalizing wrong acts Paul warned don't you know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump? 1 Cor 5:6
In 1 Cor 5: 9 he said we're not to company with fornicators. He told us in vs 13 to put away the wicked person. Read through the whole passage below,
3For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already, as though I were present, concerning him that hath so done this deed, 4In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, 5To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.6Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump? 7Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us: 8Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators: 10Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world. 11But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat. 12For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within? 13But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person. 1 Cor 5
So questions to the modern church. How far have we fallen? Do we come anyway close to having our ways in line with the Apostle's teaching? Do many Christians feel it's almost impossible to apply the instructions above? Would they feel unloving by doing so? How many would leave their church and go to a more loving place? Are church leaders afraid to apply the above? Would they be concerned the community around them would view them as extreme? Could they even be concerned about a law suit? Is a church meeting to be considered to be for the public domain anyone can come? Is that really what the Bible teaches?
Having spoke rather strongly in my post #36 but NO I do not agree with making members SIGN any such documents. To me it goes beyond what Jesus stated let your yes be yes and your no be no, and if you take it to the next stage in feeling people have to forswear themselves.....I think it violates Mt 5:33.
Yeah but what about keeping people in order and in line? You trust them. A church I went to had papers to sign after a course of membership....I couldn't do it. It went against my conscience to do so.
If you didn't sign you could never be in leadership....although they'd allow you to participate in other ways. That's what I did and I did it diligently. I worked hard in ministry of helps but they really wanted me in leadership and were sad they felt they couldn't put me in that position. They did change their policy though in time and made it if they'd see one had demonstrated over a good period of time that they're solid in the faith the need for the signature wouldn't be considered a must.