Lance Ketchum: Why I No Longer Refer To Myself as a "Fundamentalist"

[dcbii]

It’s pretty clear, at least to me, that the NT is focused on the local church rather than the universal one. Nearly all the references to ekklesia bear this out. However, this does not mean that the church universal does not exist.

And while the local church can be the pillar and ground of the truth, we’ve probably all seen a single local church go off “into the weeds” in some area. It certainly happened even in the NT. Early on, the apostles were around to help straighten that out. Now, we don’t have apostles around, and even pastors need fellowship and accountability to help keep them straight. All of us are subject to deception.

Even though the local church is the focus, the NT makes us aware (as it did the believers in Jerusalem) that there are other bodies of believers with whom we share common cause, with whom we can fellowship, and with whom we can mutually build one another up to love and good works. Focus on only the universal church and ignoring the local body is a great error (and those organizations that serve to denigrate or weaken the local church are a real problem), but to deny the existence of the universal church is hardly better.

It is quite possible to understand the few NT passages referring to what has been called “the universal church” in other ways. Also not new to the world of NT interpretation. 1) The references to “Church” in NT, which are not specified are references to the church in prospect. i.e. Those believers who have died, in Christ, + those of the present age, who may die, or be raptured, or those of the present age who may die + future believers until His Coming. or 2) the word, ekklesia is used generically referring to the church as a categorical noun. (example: I will build a car. No one comes up with the idea of the universal or invisible car. So also {possibly}: “I will build my church.” Where “church” is understood under the general category, not as a universal or invisible entity).

It may be that we have the catholic and protestant theologs to thank for the special category of the universal church. (acknowledged as a personal opinion!)

Joel Sandahl

Susan:

Accountability doesn’t mean we have to go to extremes of corporate church gov’t- what we should be able to do is address issues as they come up with churches in our neighborhoods and sphere of influence, and work toward sound doctrine and practice, and restoration if need be.

I think this is a very good point. Most people would agree that it is important for Pastors to develop relationships with other Pastors of like mind and practice in their area. They encourage one another and strengthen each other.

[Susan R] Pastors are not another species- they are our Christian brothers too. They hold an office with a degree of authority, but that office has qualifications and particular responsibilities that are to be upheld in order to remain in that office. It certainly shouldn’t remove them from the brethren to the point where they can’t be taught or rebuked or share their own burdens with others and receive comfort and restoration.

Since churches are made of believers, why do we think that churches should be completely independent? Sure- we don’t have the church down the street making decisions about how we conduct our services, or whether or not to have Sunday School during the summer, or should we use hymnals or PowerPoint. But on matters of sound doctrine, morality, ethics- when does that become nobody’s business?

Accountability doesn’t mean we have to go to extremes of corporate church gov’t- what we should be able to do is address issues as they come up with churches in our neighborhoods and sphere of influence, and work toward sound doctrine and practice, and restoration if need be.

I think part of the problem with separation is that restoration is seldom the purpose or goal. Separation should not be allowed to become a tool of manipulation for vindictive power-mongers. Too many are calling for separation over the mote (pants, movies, CCM) while leaving the beam (dishonesty, greed, gluttony, anger) intact.

Great post, Susan. GREAT post.

This idea that ‘Pastors are another species’ is ridiculous and needs to die. Their authority is limited to only that which the Bible allows, and they’re men just like any other man, with the exception that they have a higher accountability as shepherds.

Limited to what the Bible allows is correct, but there is such a thing as authority conveyed to the office. The pastor isn’t designated “overseer” (1 Tim 3:1) for nothing.

higher accountability also implies authority, else why the higher accountability?

My dh and I explain authority structures to our kids as ‘spheres of authority’. There are many authorities in our lives which intersect and overlap, but they are all limited in some way. I submit to my husband, for instance, but that submission is limited to things that aren’t in violation of Scripture, because I am also in submission to God. Ditto parental authority, gov’t authority, church authority, etc…

There is a sort of tension - a good tension - between all of the authority structures in our lives. It should keep us on our toes and in the Book. God gave us authorities and gov’ts, but each of these not only provide us with boundaries, they must observe boundaries of their own. Gov’t doesn’t interfere with us until we cross a line defined by law. Pastoral authority doesn’t give pastors permission to intervene until a person has crossed a Scripturally defined line. His authority doesn’t extend to the personal lives of his congregation- approving expenditures, hobbies, employment, and whether or not to move to Poughkeepsie. It’s not that kind of authority.

The tension extends to when/which authority trumps another another authority. And as we will ultimately stand before God, we must also acknowledge the authority of the individual believer directly to God.

Another example- We have given our children permission to ‘disobey’ any order from any adult that violates our house rules, clear Scriptural guidelines, or is something they feel is doubtful or confusing. They understand that this places some responsibility on them to be sensible and discerning. IOW, taking out the trash after a church activity is not a doubtful or confusing activity, unless the dumpster is in a dark, isolated place and they are asked to go there alone with an adult who makes them feel uncomfortable. I’m never going to tell my kids to just shut up and do what they are told simply because it is an adult, a teacher, a pastor, giving an order. They must use their God-given sense of right and wrong and learn how to make decisions for themselves.

At some point a pastor has to let his flock exercise their discernment muscles, gently counseling and guiding and leading by example. There is no room for ‘do as I say and not as I do’ from church leadership. Hence the authority hinges on the presence of those pastoral-spiritual gifts and meeting Scriptural qualifications.

That’s my theory. :)

[JoelCS]

It is quite possible to understand the few NT passages referring to what has been called “the universal church” in other ways.

Also not new to the world of NT interpretation. 1) The references to “Church” in NT, which are not specified are references to the church in prospect. i.e. Those believers who have died, in Christ, + those of the present age, who may die, or be raptured, or those of the present age who may die + future believers until His Coming. or 2) the word, ekklesia is used generically referring to the church as a categorical noun. (example: I will build a car. No one comes up with the idea of the universal or invisible car. So also {possibly}: “I will build my church.” Where “church” is understood under the general category, not as a universal or invisible entity).

Dave, I usually agree with you, but I do not believe that the gates of hell “prevailed” against any church that closed its doors. Remember that the Devil had to get permission from God to inflict Job. If Satan attacks a church to the point that it closes its doors, God could have stopped that at any time. I believe that sometimes God allows a church to close for His greater glory. Other than that, the rest of your post was great :)

[JD Miller]

Dave, I usually agree with you, but I do not believe that the gates of hell “prevailed” against any church that closed its doors. Remember that the Devil had to get permission from God to inflict Job. If Satan attacks a church to the point that it closes its doors, God could have stopped that at any time. I believe that sometimes God allows a church to close for His greater glory. Other than that, the rest of your post was great :)