Category Archives: Church Membership

Youth – Baptism and Church Membership

Posted on by

Article: Youth and Church Membership—Or, Stop Baptizing Children into the Ether by Alex Duke, editorial manager of 9Marks. He lives in Louisville, Kentucky, where he also works at Third Avenue Baptist Church as the Director of Youth Ministry and Ecclesiological Training.

So as to begin on the surest footing, allow me to list all the verses that directly address the topic of young people (that is, under 18 years old) and church membership:

That’s right. There are none. Never does the Lord tell us: this is how the new covenant people of God ought to embrace children into its number. (As I say this, paedobaptists grouse and facepalm.)

PRINCIPLED PRUDENCE

This conversation ought to happen in the realm of prudence and wisdom. This isn’t “Thus sayeth the Lord”; it’s “because the Lord hath sayeth thus about this and this and this, we’re inclined to believe this is the best way forward on that.” But the best prudential decisions are informed by principles; the best wisdom considers the law.

So what principles inform our understanding of youth and church membership? I can think of a few.

1. God saves young people.

If you were to take a straw poll at church this Sunday and ask your people a simple question—“How many of you were saved before your 18th birthday?”—it’s safe to say that many if not most people would raise their hands. Why? Because God saves young people. He saves 17-year-olds whose friends invite them to youth group. He saves 5-year-olds who show up at VBS because their unsaved parent simply needed a break and some free child care. God saves young people.

2. Church membership is only for those whom God has saved.

Our local churches—that is, our gatherings of the new covenant people of God; that is, our embassies of true Israel, now reconstituted under the headship of the risen and reigning Christ, filled by Spirit-filled priests—are not mixed bodies by design. National Israel followed a different story, of course: she was mixed by design. But not true Israel. In the new covenant age, God wanted to make crystal clear that new hearts aren’t given at the end of a

birth canal, but at the beginning of a life of faith.

3. When discerning an individual’s salvation, we look for a credible profession of faith.

When discerning whether or not someone should be recommended for membership—regardless of their age—we ought to listen for a clear understanding of the gospel, a clear sense that one has indeed been converted from death to life (even if they can’t pinpoint the day, month, or even the year), and a clear change in lifestyle and desires. If any of those three are absent, you should at least be willing to pause and consider whether or not the person in front of you has indeed been born again.

Not everyone who asks “What must I do to be saved?” really wants to be saved. Don’t believe me? Just consider the rich young ruler whose credible profession dissolved in an instant when Jesus asked him a single question about his life (Mark 10:17–22).

At least for credobaptists, these three principles are relatively uncontroversial. Unfortunately, I fear this fourth one has been largely jettisoned by many if not most credobaptist churches.

4. Baptism almost always accompanies church membership.

In 2002, I was baptized at a church but not into a church. I stood in the baptismal as a free-agent Christian, I went down into the water as a free-agent Christian, and I came up out of the water as a free-agent Christian. Never once did it occur to me—or, apparently, to anyone else—that baptism not only serves as an outward sign of an inward reality, but also as an outward introduction into a spiritual institution: the local church. I knew that baptism began my so-called Christian life, but I had no idea that my Christian life ought to be shaped around my submission to a local church.

Simply put, church membership should almost always accompany baptism. This is the nearly uniform witness of the New Testament, with the only exception that I can think of coming from Acts 8 when Philip baptizes the Ethiopian eunuch. But that exception proves the rule because it’s a baptism that occurs in a region and among a people where no church yet exists.

When we don’t keep baptism and membership close together, we turn membership into something unbiblical. So, unless you’re doing parachurch ministry among some remote tribe, baptism should accompany church membership.

That I was baptized without any connection to a church could only happen in a world that diminishes the role of the local church in a Christian’s life and discipleship. Unfortunately, this is not uncommon.

ONE OPTION OFF THE TABLE

Therefore, a church should not baptize young people apart from church membership. To do so is unbiblical, unhelpful, and unloving.

It’s unbiblical because the Bible never envisions baptized Christians living apart from membership in a local church (except on the missionary frontier, as with the Ethiopian eunuch).

It’s unhelpful because when young people begin to stray, their youth pastors are given a toolbelt with valuable tools already taken out. They can’t push a young person toward his elders; he has no elders. They can’t lay out the process of church discipline that lies before him should he continue on a particular path; he has no church who can discipline him, nor has he ever agreed to any kind of covenant that, upon breaching, would warrant his knowing removal.

And finally, it’s unloving because it hardwires in an individualistic understanding of the Christian life. For example, I was baptized at 12 and only about a decade later did I learn how Jesus intends for my discipleship to be shaped by and connected to a local church—under the authority of godly leaders, in fellowship with other saints.

That’s ten years where I was free to gallivant anywhere I wanted with no one in particular tasked before God to look out for me. Thankfully, God preserved me, but I think of my brother, or I think of literally dozens of friends whose baptism into the ether proved to be just that, the first step on a journey to nowhere. Their Christian life has dissolved, their Christian profession is now silent, and whatever tenuous connection to the local church their baptism established has been severed by a decade and a half of inattention. If a baptized person gets lost in a forest and no one is there to see it, does it really make a difference? Jesus seems to say it should (John 10:1–21).

Sadly, thousands of kids will face the same fate, and the churches they’re connected to have made it so.

They’ve been affirmed in their faith as a young person through baptism. Maybe they were 7-years-old; maybe they were 17. The moment accompanied such joy; it occasioned both a beginning and an ending, the old being washed away and the new finally coming.

But baptism apart from membership has led these young Christians through a doorway to nowhere.

It has ushered them into a place that looks like a beautiful home—a space where they can grow up and learn and explore. But it’s a façade. You see, when we baptize any new Christian, we tell them they’re family, that they can move in here with us, that they can plop down on the couch and pick out a bedroom and fill the refrigerator with their favorite food. After all, they’re going to be here a while. They’re home. But when we baptize someone apart from membership, apart from mutual commitment, we’re not inviting them into a home, but to an open house, 10am–2pm every Sunday. The furniture is staged, no one actually sleeps in these beds, and the appliances don’t even work. It’s all for show.

Churches and pastors and youth groups who make of practice of doing this, I encourage you to reconsider. It’s an unbiblical practice that bears bad fruit. Consider instead what might be helpful for that young person in five or 10 years. Consider how double-minded it is to affirm someone has been born again by God’s Spirit, but to keep them formally shut out of God’s people. Consider how—though I know it seems unthinkable right now, in a moment of such joy—you will one day forget about them, and they will forget about you, and all this would have stood for nothing.

THREE POTENTIAL APPROACHES

So, don’t baptize kids into the ether. That’s not a viable option. As I see it, however, there are at least three ways to approach this question without compromising any of the aforementioned principles. I’ll discuss these below, offering my own assessment as to how they adhere to biblical wisdom and best practices.

Approach #1: Except in unusual circumstances, a church will not accept any youth into membership because they will not baptize them.

A church like Capitol Hill Baptist would agree with the horror story I described above and, so as to avoid complicity in perpetuating that story to future generations, they will generally not baptize a young person who is still under the authority of their Christian parents. I think this practice properly underscores the seriousness with which any person—regardless of age—should take their profession of faith. See CHBC’s statement on children and baptism here.

An added bonus is that it clarifies that baptism is not a familial rite of passage. Baptism means a church has embraced an individual and an individual has submitted him- or herself to an institution other than their family.

The whirring engine behind this approach is that it’s simply hard to discern the credibility of a Christian child’s profession of faith. It’s easy to mistake obedience for regeneration.

Now, in unusual circumstances, a church like CHBC will show more flexibility: perhaps a neighborhood kid from a Muslim family starts going to church on his own and believes in Jesus; perhaps a 15-year-old has gone to public school his whole life and has a flourishing evangelistic ministry. In these made-up situations, the evidence would pile high enough so as to at least consider that young person a candidate for baptism and membership.

This is not my own view, but I’m sympathetic to this practice because it correctly identifies a problem: the scourge of nominal young people that scores of churches baptize year after year after year with no intention of ever bringing those individuals up for church discipline should their lives begin to undermine their profession of faith. In these cases, the problem isn’t the presence of baptism, but the absence of meaningful church membership and church discipline.

Sidenote: If you’re at a church that doesn’t practice church discipline at all, then you should follow this road if only because it keeps you from future disobedience.

Approach #2: A church will baptize a young person into membership-with-an-asterisk.

I’m currently the youth pastor of a church—North Shore Baptist Church in Queens, NY—that takes this second route. It’s a practice I inherited, and it works like this: We’ll baptize a young person into “provisional membership”—which means they can attend members’ meetings, serve in various capacities, receive free biblical counseling, and even be disciplined should they begin to live in unrepentant sin.

In almost every respect, they are members of NSBC except they can’t vote at our meetings, and they might be asked to leave should the topic be deemed (either by their parents or us as elders) too mature for them.

This approach acknowledges reality: they’re children, though most if not all are juniors or seniors in high school. But it also treats them in many respects as equals. It raises our expectations for them even as we’ve raised our own commitment to them—not just through their graduation from youth group but through the rest of their lives should the Lord tarry and should they stay nearby.

Approach #3: A church will baptize a young person into full voting membership.

This is basically the same as above, but with any restrictions removed. Sure, a parent may choose to withhold their child from a particular conversation, but it would not be required of them.

For what it’s worth, I’m partial to this choice because it’s cleanest. “Provisional membership” is an extrabiblical category. If a young person has been born again by God the Holy Spirit; if they are being renewed day by day into the image of Christ; if the Holy Spirit is producing in them such fruit as love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, gentleness, and self-control, then I’m happy for them to cast their vote on questions of membership, leadership, doctrine, and all the rest. Wielding the keys of the kingdom is a privilege reserved not for adults, but for those who have received the Lord Jesus, those who have believed in his name and in so doing have been given the right to become children of God.

CONCLUSION

Lest I be scolded by my higher-ups, I’m not offering the “9Marks view” on this topic, if there is one—only my own.

No matter which of the three options above you choose, you should help young people understand that the Lord’s Supper belongs to members of the church (or members of other churches in attendance). Like baptism and membership, the Supper is a sign that we belong to the body (1 Cor. 10:17). And so it makes no sense to give someone the Supper but not baptism, as parents sometimes do with their children. We must keep these three things tied together—membership, baptism, and the Supper. To divide them changes their meaning into something unbiblical.

It’s true the Bible never directly addresses the topic of how we ought to introduce young people into the membership of our churches. But it does offer principles about salvation and processes of membership that are non-negotiable and therefore must inform and shape our practice.

Meaningful Membership According to Spurgeon

Posted on by
Reply

Article by Geoff Chang (original source: https://www.9marks.org/article/a-hedging-and-fencing-how-charles-spurgeon-promoted-meaningful-membership/)

In 1851, right around the time Charles Spurgeon began preaching, a religious census was taken throughout the United Kingdom. About 61 percent of the population reportedly attended church. By way of comparison, here in America in 2020, church attendance is around 20 percent; in the UK, it’s closer to 5 percent. Can you imagine if all of our churches tripled in size? Given the religious decline in our day, it’s easy for us to be impressed with these 175-year-old statistics. Simply put, in Spurgeon’s day, to be English was to be a Christian.

But Spurgeon wasn’t impressed. Despite of all the religious activity around him, Spurgeon saw that not all of it was truly spiritual. Speaking in 1856, he said,

In going up and down this land, I am obliged to come to this conclusion, that throughout the churches there are multitudes who have “a name to live and are dead.” Religion has become fashionable. The shopkeeper could scarcely succeed in a respectable business if he were not united with a church. It is reckoned to be reputable and honorable to attend a place of worship, and hence men are made religious.[1]

Unfortunately, many churches weren’t helping with the situation. Their pastors watered down the distinction between the church and the world in an effort to reach the unsaved. Spurgeon reflects,

They say, “Do not let us draw any hard and fast lines. A great many good people attend our services who may not be quite decided, but still their opinion should be consulted, and their vote should be taken upon the choice of a minister, and there should be entertainments and amusements, in which they can assist.” The theory seems to be, that it is well to have a broad pathway from the church to the world; if this be carried out, the result will be that the nominal church will use that path to go over to the world, but it will not be used in the other direction.[2]

With the rise of theological liberalism in his day, there was less and less about the church that was distinct from the world, both in what they believed and how they lived. Even as Christian nominalism was rampant, the church looked more and more like the world.

So how did Spurgeon fight back against all this?

If you’ve ever heard the story of Spurgeon’s life and ministry, you’ve probably heard something about all the sermons he preached,  the books he published, the orphanages he started, the Pastors’ College he ran, and on and on. But we tend to overlook that, more than anything else, Spurgeon was a pastor. He wasn’t primarily a Christian speaker or CEO-at-large. No, he pastored a local church. And as a Baptist, one of his fundamental convictions was that churches should only be made up of born-again believers.

This is what we call regenerate church membership. Here’s what Spurgeon says about church membership:

Touching all the members of this select assembly there is an eternal purpose which is the original reason of their being called, and to each of them there is an effectual calling whereby they actually gather into the church; then, also, there is a hedging and fencing about of this church, by which it is maintained as a separate body, distinct from all the rest of mankind.[3]

This work of “hedging and fencing” is what keeps the church distinct from the world. And as the pastor of the Metropolitan Tabernacle, Spurgeon saw it was one of his chief duties.

THE PRACTICES OF THE METROPOLITAN TABERNACLE

Now, it’s one thing to talk the church being distinct. But how did Spurgeon practice meaningful membership in a church with over 5,000 members?

1. They guarded the front door.

One of the primary ways Spurgeon promoted meaningful church membership was through his church’s rigorous membership process.

To summarize, this process had at least six steps:

An elder interview

A visitor would come on a weekday to meet with an elder of the church to share their testimony and their understanding of the gospel. The elder would ask follow-up questions and record the testimony in one of the church’s Testimony Books. If the elder felt this was a sincere profession of faith, they would be recommended to meet with the Pastor.

Pastoral interview

Spurgeon would review the testimonies that were recorded, and, on another day, the candidate would come to meet with him. Some interviews were clear cases of conversion and Spurgeon had the joy of rejoicing in God’s grace with the candidate. Other cases resulted in further questions, as Spurgeon examined their story and their understanding of the gospel. It could be intimidating to meet with an elder or pastor, but that was never Spurgeon’s intention. Rather, he saw each membership interview as a chance to begin shepherding. He writes,

Whenever I hear of candidates being alarmed at coming before our elders, or seeing the pastor, or making confession of faith before the church, I wish I could say to them: “Dismiss your fears, beloved ones; we shall be glad to see you, and you will find your intercourse with us a pleasure rather than a trial.” So far from wishing to repel you, if you really do love the Savior, we shall be glad enough to welcome you. If we cannot see in you the evidence of a great change, we shall kindly point out to you our fears, and shall be thrice happy to point you to the Savior; but be sure of this, if you have really believed in Jesus, you shall not find the church terrible to you.[4]

Proposal to the congregation and the assignment of a messenger

The next step would be for the elder who performed the interview to present the name of the applicant and propose him for membership at a congregational meeting of the church. The congregation would then vote to approve a messenger to make an inquiry.

Messenger inquiry

The appointed messenger (usually a deacon or an elder) would visit the candidate’s place of work, home, or neighborhood and make an inquiry about his character and reputation. What were they like at home? Did they have a good reputation at work? On one occasion, a suspended policeman applied for membership at the Tabernacle, and Spurgeon encouraged the messenger to make a careful inquiry at the police station as to the details of the suspension. These inquiries not only verified the candidate’s profession of faith, but they also opened doors for the gospel.

Congregational interview and vote

Once the messenger finished his inquiry, at the next the congregational meeting, he would report on his findings. The candidate would also be present at the meeting, and he would be introduced to the congregation via a brief interview from the chair. Then he would be dismissed, and the congregation voted on his membership.

Baptism (if necessary) and communion

Finally, the candidate would be scheduled for a baptism, if necessary, and after the baptism, at the next communion service, he would receive the right hand of fellowship before the congregation and officially become a member of the church.

The Church Meeting Minutes of the Metropolitan Tabernacle from 1854–1892 reveals that 13,797 people submitted themselves to this rigorous membership process. Even as hundreds of people were joining the church each month, this process was followed consistently throughout Spurgeon’s ministry.

Personally, facts like that encourage me to believe that what took place under Spurgeon’s ministry was a genuine revival. So often, Spurgeon saw great crowds turn out for his open-air preaching. But he often observed that after the service, the people would simply disperse. There was little opportunity for follow-up. But at the Metropolitan Tabernacle, as people were converted, they were baptized, brought into the church, discipled, and engaged in the work of the church. This membership process was the way Spurgeon harvested the fruit of the Spirit’s work of revival. Spurgeon’s brother, his co-pastor, wrote this about the membership process:

We have never yet found it tend to keep members out of our midst, while we have known it of service in detecting a mistake or satisfying a doubt previously entertained. We deny that it keeps away any worth having. Surely if their Christianity cannot stand before a body of believers, and speak amongst loving sympathizing hearts, it is as well to ask if it be the cross-bearing public confessing faith of the Bible?[5]

2. They paid careful attention to the membership rolls.

As the pastor of a large and growing church, Spurgeon faced the challenge of maintaining an accurate account of membership. Speaking to his students, Spurgeon once lamented how some churches simply ignored this responsibility.

I would urge upon the resolve to have no church unless it be a real one. The fact is, that too frequently religious statistics are shockingly false. . . . Let us not keep names on our books when they are only names. Certain of the good old people like to keep them there, and cannot bear to have them removed; but when you do not know where the individuals are, nor what they are, how can you count them? They are gone to America, or Australia, or to heaven, but as far as your roll is concerned they are with you still. Is this a right thing? It may not be possible to be absolutely accurate, but let us aim at it.[6]

When Spurgeon became the pastor of the church, one of the first things he did was to go through the membership directory and find out what happened to the people there. Being in a historic church, the membership roll numbered in the hundreds, but there were only a few dozen attending. As they followed up with people, some expressed interest in coming back because of the new pastor, and they were welcomed back. But others said that they were no longer interested. Some had moved out of the area. Some were dead. Many they couldn’t find. These were all removed from membership. And Spurgeon would keep this work up. It was hard work not only taking people into membership, but also keeping track of people once they joined the church.

In a church so large, how did Spurgeon maintain an accurate membership? One of the primary methods was the use of communion tickets. Upon joining the church, each member received a perforated communion card containing numbered tickets. At a communion service each month, the tickets were collected, indicating the attendance of each member. Those who were absent for more than three months were visited by an elder or sent a letter from the church.

The labor that went into tracking members can be seen in the Elders Minute Books in the Metropolitan Tabernacle Archives. The elders met together frequently, at least once a month, usually on Mondays before the prayer meeting. The primary business of these meetings was to track non-attending members, though occasionally, they discussed other business concerning the life of the church.

Sometimes an investigation resulted in the bittersweet discovery that a member had died, or “gone to heaven.” If the elders discovered that these members had joined other churches, letters were granted and they were removed from membership.  Spurgeon believed that Christians should not be members of multiple churches, but should be committed to one church.

In many cases, the inquiry would result in an explanation for the member’s non-attendance. The reasons would vary: distance, a difficult work schedule, having missed the communion service, simply forgetting to bring the communion ticket, illness, and more. In cases of non-attendance due to hardship rather than sin, Spurgeon did not recommend their removal, but encouraged his elders to patiently care for these members.

If a sheep has strayed let us seek it; to disown it in a hurry is not the Master’s method. Ours is to be the labor and the care, for we are overseers of the flock of Christ to the end that all may be presented faultless before God. One month’s absence from the house of God is, in some cases, a deadly sign of a profession renounced, while in others a long absence is an affliction to be sympathized with, and not a crime to be capitally punished.[7]

If the elders’ visit uncovered areas of need, they would work patiently with them to encourage their participation and to provide care for them in their absence. Since each elder was assigned a particular district, he would likely work with other members in that district to provide care.

Sadly, as in any church today, there were some cases where the elders discovered serious, unrepentant sin (“a deadly sign of a profession renounced”). The elders were always involved in the investigation of these cases. The Elder Minutes reveal their regular discussions regarding cases of discipline. Multiple elders were usually involved in a particular case so that multiple witnesses could be established. If the case were serious enough, this would lead to a recommendation to the congregation for discipline. Depending on the seriousness of the case, the elders could notify the congregation of the case at varying points of the investigation.

Discipline cases during the first seven years of Spurgeon’s ministry involved instances of embezzlement, marital abandonment, financial and sexual impropriety, adultery, lasciviousness, lying, neglect of religious duties, repeated thefts, immorality, and spousal abuse. On some particularly painful occasions, the elders led the congregation in disciplining an officer in the church who had fallen into scandalous sin. Though necessary, church discipline was a painful affair for the entire church, leading to many tears.

But as painful as this process was, Spurgeon believed that true Christians could not ultimately fall away. And so, there was always the hope of restoration. In joy, the church saw God use the process of discipline to restore many to repentance. The Minute Books annual meeting membership reports record twenty-one members who were restored to membership during Spurgeon’s years. Here was yet another purpose of church discipline: to awaken backsliding members by bringing them back to the gospel.

Meaningful membership is not about maintaining a pristine church roll. It’s about helping pilgrims finish their journey to the Celestial City.

CONCLUSION

There’s so much about Spurgeon’s life and ministry that just seems mind-boggling. If you ever try to imitate Spurgeon’s schedule and ministries and activities, you probably won’t make it. And that’s probably true. Spurgeon himself once said that he did 40 membership interviews in one day, and he said that nearly killed him, because he was so exhausted.

The point here isn’t for us to try to merely replicate Spurgeon’s ministry. After all, that was a work of God unique to that man’s gifts and time in history. But Spurgeon is nonetheless a model to us of faithfulness in ministry. What would it look like for us to pursue meaningful membership in our churches today just like Spurgeon and the saints at the Metropolitan Tabernacle?

* * * * *

FOOTNOTES:

[1] New Park Street Pulpit, 2:113-114.

[2] Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, 33:212.

[3] MTP 24:542.

[4] MTP 17:198-199.

[5] The Sword and the Trowel, 1869:53-54.

[6] C. H. Spurgeon, The Greatest Fight in the World (Fearn, UK: Christian Focus, 2014), 92.

[7] S&T 1872:198.

Healthy and Dangerous Consumerism

Posted on by
Reply

Article: What Are the 3 Marks of the Church? Distinguishing between Healthy and Dangerous Consumerism by Wes Van Fleet (original source: https://www.beautifulchristianlife.com/blog/3-marks-of-the-church-distinguishing-between-healthy-and-dangerous-consumerism )

I love being a pastor. I love being able to preach God’s word and serve his people in so many ways. Yet, over the last ten years in ministry, I have seen an underlying issue in myself, as well as many of the people in the church (not just the one I serve). This is the issue of consumerism.

One of the greatest dangers to the local church today is consumerism.

Consumerism often shows itself when people share with me that they are overwhelmed with church life and need to take a step back. This often means forsaking the regular fellowship with God’s people to seek out some sort of self-realization. The heartbreaking part of watching this repeatedly over the years is the downward spiral that typically follows as people become distant from the worship service and living amongst the people of God.

Not only have I watched people become distant, I have seen them abandon the faith by “stepping back” or “figuring out what they believe.” This saddens me—and many other Christians as well—because it often shows that people aren’t actually consuming the good things God is graciously giving them. Instead, they become consumed by guilt, or worse, they go and consume what the world and the evil one offer. 

One of the greatest dangers to the local church today is consumerism.

Our culture is heavily driven by a mutual understanding between ourselves and advertisement companies that we all want to want things. It’s as if we have been trained to redefine the word “want” as “need.” Whereas one hundred years ago, people needed food, shelter, and clothing, today we all “need” the latest iPhone, the right outfit, and even the perfect church.

If you have been in the church for even a couple of minutes, it doesn’t take long to identify what people believe the church “needs” to look like and function like. Even more telling is why people leave churches. Often times the perceived “needs” that aren’t being met are things like better music, a more dynamic preacher, more ministries, better coffee, and anything that somehow feeds the consumer’s desires.

Are we aware of the depth of consumerism we bring to the church?

The reality is, most of us are this way. We may have different perceived “needs” that we demand of the church, but the question is, Are we aware of the depth of consumerism we bring to the church? If we can start to compare our perceived needs with what Christ’s church is actually meant to be, we can start moving towards a healthier understanding of need and avoid destroying the local church for not meeting all our expectations.   

We all have this natural disposition to be consumers. The question we should really be asking is, Are we consuming things that lead to self-fulfillment and self-glory, or are we consuming the means of grace that God himself wants us to receive with glad hearts for his glory and our good?

This was one of the concerns of the Reformers and many who have followed in their footsteps. Returning to Scripture, many have tried to rightly see the Roman Catholic Church for what it was then—and is now—and move away from consumeristic tradition and return to the means of grace commanded by God in Scripture. These means of grace, also known as the marks of the church, are 1) the true preaching of the Word; 2) the right administration of the sacraments; and 3) the faithful exercise of discipline. [1]

1. True Preaching

The true preaching of the word of God is not perfect preaching. It is preaching that faithfully and honestly preaches the point of a passage the way God’s word explains it. It is preaching in such a way that people are confronted with their sin and need while also being shown Christ as the fulfillment of every passage. This is preaching in such a way that, if people would hear, by God’s grace they would believe in the gospel and the Lord Jesus Christ (Rom. 10:14-17). It is preaching the whole counsel of God and not just the preacher’s favorite topics.

In short, true preaching has such a high view of the word of God, that those preaching and those listening become convinced that as surely as the word is faithfully preached, it is as if Christ himself were preaching. We should readily consume the preaching of the word of God each Sunday. 

2. Administering the Sacraments

The right administration of the sacraments is served by the pastors and elders of the church and only to professing believers. These sacraments, baptism and the Lord’s Supper, are meant to be the visible signs and seals attached to the preached Word of God. There is nothing magical to the sacraments, but they were commanded by Christ himself (Matt. 28:19; 1 Cor. 11:23-30) as a means of grace. These are the visible reminders that we should be ready to consume joyfully, because in doing so, we are reminded of our union with Christ. 

3. Church Discipline

This third mark of a faithful church was once seen as welcome and necessary by believers. But in a consumeristic culture like ours, it is often frowned upon and seen as judgmental and unloving. Yet, Christ has given us church discipline as a means of grace that protects healthy doctrine and helps the church rightly represent him to other believers and the world.

It also purifies the church of all unrepentant sinners who prove not to be regenerate with no true love for Christ (Matt. 18:15-18; 1 Cor. 5:1-5; Tit. 3:10; Rev. 2:14-20). Even so, church discipline is meant to be restorative; its purpose is also to help members of the body of Christ by lovingly shepherding them back to faith and repentance. This accountability to continue walking with Christ is one that we should gladly welcome and consume. 

Christ loves his people and wants to feed them.

These three marks are meant to be reminders to us that Christ loves his people and wants to feed them. These are non-negotiable means of grace and growth in our lives. These are the things we should be encouraging our pastors in continuing to do, and lovingly correcting them if they are not. In these ordinary means of grace, God is coming down to us and saying, “Here I am—enjoy!”

After Peter denied the Lord Jesus three times, he came face-to-face with Peter after his resurrection. Jesus redeemed the three denials with three commands to feed his sheep (John 21:15-17). Paul, who once was consumed by self-righteousness and pride (Phil. 3:4-6), commanded the Corinthians to consume and feast on the body and blood of Jesus (1 Cor. 11:23-30). Likewise, Paul guided his churches through holiness and purity by protecting the sheep and rejecting the wolves. 

There is a healthy consumerism to be enjoyed.

The people of God today can reject worldly consumerism by pleading with the Lord to help them sit under these three marks with hunger and longing. In doing so, we are feasting on the Lord Jesus with our ears, our eyes, our taste, and our lives. To feast on the bread of life (John 6:35-39) is to trust in the Lord Jesus and the words, meals, and purity he gives us as we make our way home to our Trinitarian God.