Membership Class?

[dawgs10]

Yes Paul, there is a big difference in being saved (joining the universal church) and becoming a member of a local congregation.

[dolfan]

Interesting discussion!

This is one of those things that truly cuts both ways. It is hard, in my opinion, to have a one-size-fits-all answer as to whether a pre-membership class is advisable. Where we are members now, there is no such requirement. Where we were members before and were far more involved in a leadership role in the church, we had one. Guess which church has a better track record of discipling and maturing people? Yup -- our current church. I don't know if our former church -- which has undergone such an extensive change of leadership and people and belief that I seriously doubt they have such a class (given their model, not stating any suppositions about their substance) -- is doing much to mature people and root them in the faith and multiply ministry. They may be -- I don't know.

But, does that mean anything?! I don't think so. Our pastoral leadership is so different from what I was part of before that comparisons are impossible to draw. I think that, even within COGOP, the degrees of difference are probably more than someone might think at first blush. Take any 15 churches in a relatively close geographical area and you'll find some pretty wide differences in makeup, community population, job histories, education, all that. The most common thing you're likely to find among them is that the more direct pastoral attention paid to them by themselves (the extent of ownership taken by the members to care for one another, not just the pastor's doing of it), regardless of where they are or where they are from, the more likely you are to have more mature, informed and growing disciples as members.

So, IF that's the case (and I realize I'm building one supposition on another, which is dangerous!), it SEEMS that the question is "how does our local church best shepherd those within our reach?" as opposed to "do we need a pre-membership class?". Maybe a class like that IS the answer in your local church -- or not. I'm inclined to think, "Hey, yeah, let's have a class." But, that's because I LOVE classes and teaching and learning and all that goes with that. Pastorally, it may not be the wise approach. While you figure that out, does the Holy Spirit have a pause button before people who are saved are added to the body? I don't think so.

Every local church has to work that out based on the leading of the Holy Spirit and exercising the gifts of the Spirit and the ministries of the church in unity. I think you can probably do that on your face before God!!

[paul]

Do we believe that God directs the path of the belilever and to what extent does He? Does that also include one being led by the Holy Spirit to a local community of Believers ?

Are classes for the benifit of the new believer or is it a means to cull
(identify and remove) and have only those that are in perfect agreement with doctrine, practice, idology with us.

All the statstics (although generalized) points to the Church in the Western World as being in decline. Attendance, Commitment, Understanding of Biblical Values to name a few.

We are constantly seeking more things of the natural to offset these but they seem to be failing.

Personally the best class that a new person can take is the one coming from a true shepherd from behind the pulpit and from being accepted by those in that local community of believers. They will know quickly if this is truly the place that God has led them and to what degree they want to become involved.

[dawgs10]

It by no means is used to cull. Its used to educate people to what church they are joining.

[Pastor Gary]

It by no means is used to cull. Its used to educate people to what church they are joining.

My problem with that is that I don't think anyone EVER knows it all or even necessarily has to AGREE with everything to join. If I was held to that standard myself I would have left 100 times during the days when I had serious issues with some of our past doctrines.

[scooter]

It by no means is used to cull. Its used to educate people to what church they are joining.

My problem with that is that I don't think anyone EVER knows it all or even necessarily has to AGREE with everything to join. If I was held to that standard myself I would have left 100 times during the days when I had serious issues with some of our past doctrines.

Response: I have had those impromptu moments and have taken people in without classes. I normally wait for a batch. I'll have a basics teachings class one or two Sundays during SS.

I'm a bit leary of a wide open approach where anyone can join at any time.

I don't take in people living together/shacking up. Should I?

I'm sorting through some of these issues.

Good discussion.

[Pastor Gary]

It by no means is used to cull. Its used to educate people to what church they are joining.

My problem with that is that I don't think anyone EVER knows it all or even necessarily has to AGREE with everything to join. If I was held to that standard myself I would have left 100 times during the days when I had serious issues with some of our past doctrines.

Response: I have had those impromptu moments and have taken people in without classes. I normally wait for a batch. I'll have a basics teachings class one or two Sundays during SS.

I'm a bit leary of a wide open approach where anyone can join at any time.

I don't take in people living together/shacking up. Should I?

I'm sorting through some of these issues.

Good discussion.

No - I don't take in anybody who walks in the door, and NO, you shouldn't admit shack-ups to membership. What I am talking about is people who have attended regularly, participated in the life of the church, but somehow never joined. I have had those people surprise me by walking forward when others were up to take the membership covenant, and I — personally — receive them with no further prerequisites than our church polity dictates... in other words, saved.

[scooter]

No - I don't take in anybody who walks in the door, and NO, you shouldn't admit shack-ups to membership. What I am talking about is people who have attended regularly, participated in the life of the church, but somehow never joined. I have had those people surprise me by walking forward when others were up to take the membership covenant, and I — personally — receive them with no further prerequisites than our church polity dictates... in other words, saved.

Response: The problem arises when the shackups show up.

Let just say you're taking in members and a couple come up that having been hanging around, then a "couple" comes up that have been coming a couple of weeks and they're living together. That's when it presents itself, to me, as a possible problem area.

To me a simple member's class shields you from the problem.

[Pastor Gary]

No - I don't take in anybody who walks in the door, and NO, you shouldn't admit shack-ups to membership. What I am talking about is people who have attended regularly, participated in the life of the church, but somehow never joined. I have had those people surprise me by walking forward when others were up to take the membership covenant, and I — personally — receive them with no further prerequisites than our church polity dictates... in other words, saved.

Response: The problem arises when the shackups show up.

Let just say you're taking in members and a couple come up that having been hanging around, then a "couple" comes up that have been coming a couple of weeks and they're living together. That's when it presents itself, to me, as a possible problem area.

To me a simple member's class shields you from the problem.

I have never experienced that, but certainly see how that could happen in many churches. I have had people come forward who were in need of counseling and clarification and had to awkwardly pray, thank everyone for coming up, and then divide the group... "These are prepared to join TODAY, and we have these who will be meeting with me for future membership..."

[Pastor Gary]

No - I don't take in anybody who walks in the door, and NO, you shouldn't admit shack-ups to membership. What I am talking about is people who have attended regularly, participated in the life of the church, but somehow never joined. I have had those people surprise me by walking forward when others were up to take the membership covenant, and I — personally — receive them with no further prerequisites than our church polity dictates... in other words, saved.

Response: The problem arises when the shackups show up.

Let just say you're taking in members and a couple come up that having been hanging around, then a "couple" comes up that have been coming a couple of weeks and they're living together. That's when it presents itself, to me, as a possible problem area.

To me a simple member's class shields you from the problem.

I have never experienced that, but certainly see how that could happen in many churches. I have had people come forward who were in need of counseling and clarification and had to awkwardly pray, thank everyone for coming up, and then divide the group... "These are prepared to join TODAY, and we have these who will be meeting with me for future membership..."

[dawgs10]

A foundation's course helps to avoid that. And Gary, they do not have to agree with everything. They just have to know our foundational belief system. I have been thanked for our class because afterward people did not want to become members because of personal disagreement with doctrine. I have also had people disagree and become members anyway. Its a very good tool. Salvation is the only prerec. we us for membership.

[PastorDaniel]

Quick jab thought....I am in favor of "all of the above"....no single approach offers a solution....we are not cookie cut images....things of this nature should be up to the local church who knows the specific nature and problems of the people in their community....it does not have to be instituionalized or IA mandated....the options we have are enough...salvation required...discipleship required....

[Pastor Bill]

Personally I think the class is a good idea.

The Bible is clear, in the verse many have quoted, that they were taken into THE CHURCH immediately, and I completely believe that, unfortunately that is way above my pay grade, so The Master has to keep that role.

The Bible is also clear that we must know those that labor among us. and whether that is through a class, or personal side by side working, we are not to just jump into any relationship.

When I first joined my current church, everyone already knew me, I had been to the church often, and really in many ways have considered it my home church even while I was the pastor elsewhere and held my membership at those local churches. When I first came, a friend pulled me to the side and told me how a few things were handled (administrative things, for example, no problems go to the pastor on Sunday morning, other leaders take care of anything that comes up and let him forcus on the service, then we'll fill him in later). I attended for a little while before we actually moved our membership, mostly just hadn't gotten to it yet, but even as close as I was/am to the pastor, and to the other leaders and members in this congregation, I still had things to learn about what we were doing locally.

Add to that someone who is not familiar with the CoGoP, our teachings, or (imagine this) they are completely unchurched, but get saved and come in knowing NOTHING. They are going to need some instruction, and tying that to a membership class is a good way to squeeze it in there, without saying "boy you have a lot to learn" or assuming they have been taught or know where we stand.

[dawgs10]

You are correct. actually a lawyer in our church went to a training on this matter. homosexuals coming out of the closet after becoming members. regardless of documents and public doctrinal statements the church's can be held liable in lawsuits when the church attempts to remove the homosexual from membership. A class must be in place and the membership must go through the class. Its the world we live.

[dolfan]

Dawgs, I'd add this -- the church shouldn't be worried about lawsuits. Two reasons: First, in almost every state and I'm certain that in every federal circuit, courts would say churches have the power and authority to make the ecclesiastical choice of disciplining members for behavior that contradicts that body's understanding and interpretation of scripture. None of that makes anyone immune from being sued, but it does confine actual suits to mostly nuisance status unless some other substantive injury occurs as the church goes about its business. As we sit here, there is still no right to be a homosexual who forces churches to accept or keep homosexuals as members under American law. Second, if the government DOES impose itself in contradiction of what I just described, let the chips fall.

That's my .02. The best laid out policies and statements are not going to prevent a homosexual from targeting a church/denomination in some sort of court case. Anybody can be sued, not just anyone can win.