Baptism and Church Membership

Some theological theses from an ecumenical baptist perspective

Rev. Dr Thorwald Lorenzen

I. The Context

1. The challenge of peace and justice. In a world where there is too much mistrust, hatred, injustice and war, and where religions are often being used and misused and allow themselves to be used and misused to intensify conflicts, it is imperative that all people of good will participate in the struggle for peace, truth and justice.

2. Ecumenical responsibility. As Christians we confess “one Lord, one faith, one baptism” (Eph 4:5), and therefore we belong to the one body of Christ (Rom 12:5; 1 Cor 10:16f., 12:12f.). Such ecumenical thrust is inherent to our faith in Christ, and no church that is concerned about its very origin and foundation can escape ecumenical longing and responsibility.

3. The question of truth. Nevertheless, ecumenical responsibility can not be advanced at the expense of truth. Ecumenical encounters, conversations and dialogues are carried on in all parts of the world and among all major Christian denominations. They presuppose that “the Lord has yet more light and truth to break forth from his word”. We are all in the process of becoming what we are in Christ, none of us is infallible and therefore all of us are invited to repent and change in the direction of Christ.

With regard to the theology and practice of baptism this places special burdens and responsibilities upon Baptists, and it makes us all painfully aware of the broken and sinful state of the “body of Christ”. On the one hand Baptists want to respect the sacramental dignity and integrity of other churches. They want to recognise other churches as churches. They are committed to the New Testament understanding and practice of one baptism, and consequently, with the other churches, Baptists reject the practice of re-baptism. On the other hand, we can not overlook the fact that believers’ baptism is becoming universally recognised as the baptism that was practiced by the first Christians, and many voices, including theological voices from paedo-baptist churches, suggest that it may be the Baptist responsibility within the wider church to uphold the theology and practice of believers’ baptism.

Given the practice of indiscriminate infant baptism in many of the established majority churches, it often happens that people who come to faith in Christ have no inner personal relationship to their own infant baptism. In such cases a conflict arises between the sacramental integrity of the church that baptised the person as an infant, the freedom of conscience of the person who has come to faith in Christ and wants to celebrate and confess that faith in baptism, and a commitment to a responsible theology of baptism.

Given the ambiguity of the situation - indiscriminate infant baptism, ecumenical responsibility, believers’ baptism - a clear cut answer is not possible. In finding an acceptable response we need to balance our understanding of Christian baptism with our responsibility to the wider church and a pastoral concern for people who seek membership and/or baptism in our churches.

4. Credibility. There is no doubt that in many countries the credibility of the church is at stake today. Many churches tend to either fulfil the expected societal function of sanctioning the social, cultural, economic and political status quo; or they tend to withdraw from societal responsibility into the safe harbour of a comfortable religious existence. Having recognised these dangers, churches today search for a new understanding of “church” in which the church more closely reflects its foundation, the story of Jesus. Traditional baptist emphases on the gathered and the intentional community, and on the importance of preaching have received ecumenical interest and relevance. These emphases need to be brought into a creative correlation with other insights and experiences from the charismatic tradition, the sacramental practices and the emphases on ministerial offices.

II. By what authority?

To discuss an issue such as baptism and to reach a conclusion about its theology and practice, the foundation on which such a conclusion is based needs to be made explicit. Is there a norm by which present theology and practice can be measured? Is there a source from which renewal can spring?

1. Sola Scriptura (“Scripture alone”) - solus Christus (“Christ alone”). There is widespread theological consensus that the authority for Christian faith and practice is Jesus Christ as he is confessed in the Scriptures.

2. Creeds and confessions. Controversial is, what authority denominational creeds and confession have in the understanding and interpretation of Scripture. Here Baptists emphasise the sola in sola scriptura. While Anglicans have The Articles of Religion (1562) and Lutherans have their Augsburg Confession (1530) which guide them in their reading and interpretation of the Scriptures, Baptists have no universally valid confessions and creeds. When therefore the New Testament clearly indicates believers’ baptism with the chronological order of faith being followed by baptism, then these emphases are accepted as determinative unless there are theological reasons that would speak against such a procedure. For Anglicans and Lutherans, to use these two large churches as illustrations, the matter is much more difficult. Both churches affirm the authority of the Scriptures, but at the same time they insist that their creeds and confession with their insistence on the practice of infant baptism are valid interpretations of the Scriptures.

3. Tradition. This does not mean that Baptists do not admit and appreciate the theological importance of traditions that go beyond the biblical canon. Revelation can not be frozen into the period when the New Testament was written. But by closing the biblical canon in the fourth century, the church recognised the need for evaluating and measuring tradition. Baptists (together with other Protestant denominations) therefore recognise the critical dimension of the biblical canon by distinguishing between legitimate and illegitimate traditions. The criterion for such a distinction is the christological content of the Scriptures.

III. Baptism in the earliest (New Testament) churches

1. Believers’ baptism. The New Testament sources indicate that in early Christianity all people who experienced faith in Jesus Christ were baptised “into Christ” and became a members of the church - the universal “body of Christ”, concretely manifest in a local house church. Believers were baptised in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit (explicit in Matthew 28:19). This baptism into the trinitarian history of God is also implied in the baptisms “in the name of Jesus” (Acts 2:38, 22:16).

2. The missionary situation. Believers’ baptism originally took place in a missionary situation. People were invited to faith in Christ and on their positive and voluntary response they were baptised and became members of a local house church. It is being argued by paedo-baptist churches that in countries where Christian churches have been established, that such a missionary situation is no longer given. Such arguments have never been wholly convincing since no country has ever been totally Christian, and as secularity and pluralism increases, such arguments become even less convincing.

1 Corinthians 7:14 suggests that children participate in their parents’ faith and baptism: “... the unbelieving husband is made holy through his wife, and the unbelieving wife is made holy through her husband. Otherwise, your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy.” This makes sense in a society that has not been permeated by modern “Western” individualism. The implication is, of course, that one day the children would be mature enough to hear and respond to the Gospel for themselves.

Although the established churches in traditionally Christian countries are still strong, and many, if not most, children are being baptised as infants, it can hardly be overlooked that modern “Western” societies are rapidly becoming more and more pluralistic and secular. The corpus christianum, that great marriage between Christianity and culture that has lasted from Constantine in the 4th century up to the Reformation and beyond, is a thing of the past. This is being acknowledged by most churches and therefore, at least in theory, paedo-baptist churches increasingly offer believers’ baptism as an option, or even a preferred option.

3. Different theological emphases. The unified New Testament witness to the one baptism, and this being believers’ baptism, and the universal practice of baptism does not exclude that there were different theological emphases and interpretations for the meaning and importance of baptism.

3.1. It is interesting, for instance, that we do not know whether Jesus baptised his followers or not. The only texts that speak to this question are contradictory (John 3:22, 4:1f.).

3.2. The apostle Paul, on the one hand does not question the importance of baptism and indeed builds his moral exhortations on the indicative of faith and baptism (in Romans 6 for instance), yet on the other hand he baptised only very few people (1 Cor 1:10-18) and he states explicitly: “...Christ did not send me to baptise but to proclaim the gospel ...” (1 Cor 1:17).

3.3. In Romans 6:1-11 the apostle Paul makes a distinction between having been buried with Christ in baptism, the subsequent Christian life, and then the future resurrection, while in the post-Pauline tradition - in Colossians 2:12 - this distinction is erased.

Romans 6:4 Therefore we have been buried with him by baptism into death, so that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life. 6:5 For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we will certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his. 6:6 We know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body of sin might be destroyed, and we might no longer be enslaved to sin. 6:7 For whoever has died is freed from sin. 6:8 But if we have died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him.

Colossians 2:12 when you were buried with him in baptism, you were also raised with him through faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead.

3.4. While most texts in the New Testament suggest the sequence Word - Faith - Baptism, there are also texts that emphasise that baptism saves and that in baptism the impartation of the Holy Spirit takes place (1 Peter 3:21; Titus 3:4-7).

4. Jesus’ baptism. Although Jesus probably did not baptise, Jesus himself was baptised by John the Baptists. This baptism of Jesus by John was not a Christian baptism. It did not include the reference to Jesus’ death and resurrection which is essential for Christian baptism. Nevertheless, Jesus baptism became formative in the Christian understanding of baptism and it was told and passed on with having Christian baptism in mind.

5. The household baptisms. It is unlikely that in New Testament days children were baptised. Household baptisms (Acts 16:33; 1 Cor 1:16) could have included children, but there is an increasing scholarly consensus that that was probably not the case. If children were baptised, they were children of believers. There was no indiscriminate baptism in the early church.

6. Baptist emphases. Baptists accept the New Testament witness to baptism as authoritative (sola scriptura), and they affirm that this has implications for other theological convictions:

6.1. The qualitative difference between God and humanity is affirmed. God comes to the believer and grants faith, while the believer gratefully receives the gift of faith and celebrates it in baptism.

6.2. Reality is understood as relational and therefore human persons must be addressed as responsive and responsible people.

6.3. The Reformation sola fide (by “faith alone”) is affirmed in that faith is not relativised or by-passed or dissolved into grace.

6.4. The Reformation sola gratia (through “grace alone”) is affirmed in that God is understood on God’s terms (revelation) - “God is love”. Love cannot coerce. It seeks, begs, persuades and longs for human voluntary agreement, which in the believers’ confession is itself the work of the Spirit of God.

6.5. The sola gratia is fully recognised in believers’ baptism. In baptism the believer and the community of faith celebrate that God in his mercy has shared his life with the believer. At the same time believers confess that Jesus Christ has in the event of faith become their ultimate concern. Baptism is not human work. It is grateful response, confession and obedience to what God has done.

IV. Baptism, salvation and church.

1. Is baptism necessary for salvation and church membership? All major churches consider baptism to belong to the esse (the necessary being), not only the bene esse (the desirable being) or the plene esse (the complete being), of salvation and of the church. Baptism in the trinitarian name of God is considered to be necessary for salvation and for church membership. The sacramental dignity and integrity of a church or a denomination is therefore at stake if and when the validity of their baptism is questioned or denied.

2. The linking of baptism with “original sin”. The doctrine of Infant Baptism has traditionally been closely linked to the doctrine of inherited guilt and original sin. Some major churches therefore practice emergency baptism if an infant is in danger of dying. This implies and it is admitted that there is a difference “in the sight of God” between a baptised infant and an unbaptised infant.

3. The importance of baptism for Baptists. Baptists agree that baptism is demanded by the Scriptures and that therefore it is important. At the same time they are divided on whether baptism is necessary for salvation and for being a Christian. The following reasons tend to suggest for most Baptists that baptism is not necessary for salvation and for belonging to the “body of Christ”, but that it is necessary for belonging to a Baptist church.

3.1. There is a widespread conviction that the human being is free (however limited such freedom may be) and therefore can be responsible. For Baptists, baptism falls more into the realm of human response and it is therefore not necessary for salvation.

3.2. Such human response is to be distinguished but not separated from the event of faith as hearing and receiving the gospel.

3.3. Baptists would be hesitant to build a theology of baptism, and thereby a whole ecclesiology, on the doctrine of original sin.

3.4. The fate of children “before God” is covered by God’s unconditional grace until such time that they can hear the gospel and determine their ultimate concern for themselves.

3.5. It is of course important to acknowledge and respect the sacramental dignity and integrity of a church. At the same time we must not overlook the contemporary ecumenical consensus that emphasises the ethical implications of baptism and that is critical of indiscriminate infant baptism. Is it therefore not legitimate to ask whether the integrity of baptism with its ethical implication, does not weigh as heavily as the sacramental integrity of a church?

V. Baptism, Christ, and the Holy Spirit.

1. Baptism “into Christ”. Baptism as a religious rite was known and practiced in the ancient world (Judaism, Qumran, Hellenistic mystery cults, John the Baptist). Christian baptism has its meaning and identity not in the historical rite as such, but in what it brings to expression: the story of Jesus. Christian baptism is a baptism “into Christ”.

2. In the power of the Spirit. Christian baptism effectively inter-relates the story of Jesus with the life of the believer. This is the work of the Holy Spirit. Baptism is therefore not merely an act of obedience, it is not merely following Jesus’ example or command, it is certainly not a sacrament which is effective in and of itself, but it is a spiritual event in which God’s grace calls for a human response and human obedience. The togetherness and mutual complementarity of divine grace and human response and human voluntary obedience make up the content of baptism. Baptism presupposes faith and therefore it cannot be a sacrament which is effective in and of itself; baptism includes grace and therefore it cannot be a mere symbol or sign or ordinance.

3. By immersion. A symbol or sign must portray as closely as possible the matter that it re-presents.

The christological dimension of baptism is symbolised in the fact that believers are “buried” with Christ into his death, and then “raised” with Christ to newness of life (Romans 6). This analogy of Christ’s death and resurrection to that of the believer is best symbolised by the mode of immersion. At the same time it must be emphasised that baptism does not and can not add anything to the event of salvation which is given with the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

4. In water. Water has the symbolic quality of life and purification. In the fourth Gospel, Jesus says to Nicodemus: “no one can enter the kingdom of God without being born of water and Spirit” (3:5). In the waters of baptism, believers place themselves under the liberating Lordship of Christ and at the same time the Spirit effectively confirms the unconditional “Yes” which God has spoken in Christ.

5. The trinitarian formula. Through faith and baptism believers become part of God’s wider trinitarian history with his creation. Believers are therefore baptised “in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 28:19). This is the only way we can verbally and sacramentally demonstrate that God has revealed himself in Jesus and that our experience of Jesus in the power of the Spirit is indeed an experience of God.

VI. Baptism and faith.

There is theological consensus that baptism requires faith to become what it is. While in the New Testament faith precedes baptism, churches which practise infant baptism claim that either the child has faith, or that the order of faith and baptism is arbitrary.

Baptists follow the New Testament pattern: faith is created by the Spirit through the Word, and this faith is then confessed and celebrated in baptism.

VII. Baptism and the church.

1. Baptism and church membership. Although faith comes to each individual, it does not individualise believers. It creates a community of faith, the church, of which people become members through faith and baptism. Since the universal “body of Christ” is manifest in the local church, baptism should normally be linked to church membership.

2. Baptism and discipleship. The early Christian witness and the experience of believers in non-Christian cultures today may help us to become aware of the revolutionary nature of baptism. Believers are baptised “into Christ”. Christ becomes their ultimate concern. It often implies a change of loyalties. Baptism can therefore call forth suffering, rejection and persecution.

3. New alliances. Through faith and baptism, however, the believer finds a new family, the family of God, in which the barriers of racism, sexism and other ideologies that bring enmity and separation into the human family are relativised (Gal 3:23-28; compare Mark 3:31-35).

4. Baptism and the “priesthood of all believers”. Baptism gives expression to the “priesthood of all believers” and therefore continually questions hierarchical and institutional structures in the churches. This alone would be sufficient theological reason for the ordination of women.

VIII. The meaning of Baptism

1. Diversity of meanings. The diversity of meanings that the early Christians applied to baptism is simply overwhelming. All facets of the riches of salvation that become real in the event of faith are also ascribed to baptism. Whatever is said about grace or about the fruits of the Spirit is also said about baptism. It is clear that Christian baptism is an integral part of the event of faith in which the story of Jesus becomes inter-related with the story of the believer.

A few symbols that are related to baptism reveal the importance and the rich content of baptism:

• participating in the life, death and resurrection of Christ (Gal 3:26f.; Rom 6:3-11; Col 2:11f.).

• forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38, 22:16; 1 Cor 6:11; Col 2:12f.; Heb 10:22f.).

• justification (Gal 3:26f.; 1 Cor 6:11; Rom 6:7; Tit 3:5.7).

• new life (Eph 2:5f.).

• sanctification (1 Cor 6:11; Eph 5:25f.).

• the gift of the Spirit (Acts 2:38, 19:1-6; 1 Cor 6:11, 12:13; Gal 3:26-4:6).

• conversion (Tit 3:5; John 3:5).

• liberation from bondage (1 Cor 10:1f.).

• deliverance from evil powers (Col 1:13).

• inheriting the kingdom of God (John 3:5).

• creating and shaping a new humanity (Gal 3:27f.; 1 Cor 12:13).

• incorporation in the “body of Christ” (1 Cor 12:13; Gal 3:27f.; Acts 2:41).

• assurance of future salvation (Eph 1:13f., 4:30).

2. No sacramental security. In all this we must not forget that the meaning and value of baptism remains dependent on the living presence of Christ and the faith and obedience of the believer. There is no sacramental security: 1 Corinthians 10:1-22.

IX. The ethical implications of baptism.

1. The story of Jesus as the foundation and content of baptism. Through faith and baptism the life of the believer is inter-locked with the story of Jesus and with the gift of the Holy Spirit. The story of Jesus includes Jesus’ life, death and resurrection. Jesus’ life entailed a specific vision of God and of God’s ways with his world. This vision was Jesus’ ultimate concern and for this vision Jesus was willing to be opposed, arrested, tried and executed. However, God raised Jesus from the dead and thereby constituted a new reality into which the believer is baptised. Those who are baptised “into Christ” become partakers of a “new” reality which is founded and shaped by the resurrection of the crucified Christ.

2. Faith as discipleship. This “new” reality is a realm in which the victory of Christ over the forces of estrangement is lived and celebrated. It calls for a life-style in which the loyalty to Christ and the power of the Spirit is reflected. Baptism as the “dying” with Christ and the “being raised” with Christ to newness of life (Rom 6) can only be lived in obedient discipleship. The baptised believer manifests the fruits of the Spirit. Baptism “has ethical implications which not only call for personal sanctification, but also motivate Christians to strive for the realisation of the will of God in all realms of life (Rom 6:9ff.; Gal 3:27-28; 1 Peter 2:21-4:6).” This new life-style includes dimensions such as:

• distinguishing between the weakness of power (Pilate, Constantine, Imperialism, Racism, Apartheid) and the power of weakness (Jesus, the persecuted church, Mahatma Ghandi, Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King, Aung San Suu Kyi);

• affirming the partiality of God for the widow, the orphan, the stranger, the oppressed, the refugee, the asylum seeker, the single mother, the tortured and the many others who have no voice, no friends and no power;

• believing that it is worthwhile to commit oneself to follow Jesus and therefore to pursue justice, peace and the integrity of creation even in the face of often insurmountable odds;

• that it is better to “be” than to “have” and therefore resist the ideologisation of money and private property which often make an ultimate claim upon our conscience and therefore result in intolerance, racism and injustice;

• trust in the power of non-violence.

X. Baptism and ecumenical responsibility

There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to the one hope of your calling, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is above all and through all and in all. (Ephesians 4:4-6).

Christian baptism receives its significance from being related to the story of Jesus which is part of the trinitarian history of God with his creation. The particularity and the uniqueness of Christ, and the particularity and uniqueness of faith implies that there can only be one baptism by the one Spirit (1 Cor 12:13) into the one body of Christ (1 Cor 10:16f., Rom 12:5). The ecumenical implications are evident.

Baptism can never be the property of any one denomination. We can not disregard that all Christians are members of the “body of Christ”. All responsible Christian theology today must be ecumenical theology. Denominational and other divisions among Christian churches must be regarded as a tremendous stumbling block for the credibility and mission of the Christian churches. Every church must try to make its contribution to the healing of misunderstandings and of divisions. The commitment to truth in each denomination or movement must be matched by an equal commitment to manifest the unity of the “body of Christ”.

With regard to baptism there seems to be an insurmountable impasse. On the one hand infant baptism is so central to the theology, identity and integrity of the paedo-baptist churches that apart from some theologians (chief among them are some of the most famous Protestant theologians in our century: Karl Barth, Jürgen Moltmann and Eberhard Jüngel) there seems to be no institutional willingness to question the theology and practice of infant baptism. Any theological challenge to the doctrine of infant baptism is immediately seen as questioning the sacramental integrity of the paedo-baptist churches. On the other hand those churches who practise believers’ baptism have the testimony of Scripture and the encouragement of major theologians, including those from the paedo-baptist tradition, on their side.

Is there a way forward? Will the churches find resources in their faith to deal with this crisis, or will they wait, as they have done too often, to let the secular world set the agenda?

I can only see one way forward at present. That the churches retrieve in their theology and practice what they confess in their creeds and confessions, namely, that “Jesus Christ, as he is testified to us in the Holy Scripture, is the one Word of God, whom we are to hear, whom we are to trust and obey in life and in death.”

Perhaps, a new concentration on Christ and on following him could relativise the importance and centrality of baptism and thus allow greater flexibility in its theology and practice. For Baptists this may mean a greater willingness to respect the meaning that baptism may have for Christians who have been baptised as infants and to honour and appreciate the sacramental integrity of paedo-baptist churches. For paedo-baptist churches it may have to imply a willingness to cease the practice of indiscriminate infant baptism, and to offer believers’ baptism as a real alternative.

XI. Baptism and Church Membership

Amongst other things (see above sections VIII and IX) baptism is also the entry into the “body of Christ”: “... in the one Spirit we were all baptised into one body” (1 Cor 12:13). The “body of Christ”, the “church of God”, is historically manifest in the local church. “There should thus be no baptism without membership in a church which is a local manifestation of the universal Body of Christ.”

Membership practice and its relation to baptism varies in Baptist churches. Three practices with a number of variations are predominant: closed membership, open membership, and modified open membership. I shall briefly describe these three approaches, point out their ecumenical implications, and add an evaluation which attempts to keep in mind both the historical identity of Baptists and the present-day ecumenical challenge.

1. Closed Membership. Most Baptist churches practice closed membership. Only persons who have been baptised as believers by immersion can be admitted into membership.

In closed membership churches we meet two "communion" practices. Most churches practice open communion. At the communion table a general invitation is issued stating that all those who confess Jesus Christ as Lord and live in charity toward their neighbours are invited to participate. Some Baptist churches practice closed communion. In this case, only baptised believers are invited to participate in the Lord's Supper.

The “closed membership” and “closed communion” practice is certainly the most logical one. Is participation in the Lord’s Supper not “watered down” if the requirements for participation in it are less stringent than for church membership?

However we live in a broken world and in a broken church. No church has the right to question the Christian integrity of another church. If therefore members of another church are present at the worship service they should be invited to share in the Lord’s Supper.

If a member of another denomination who has not been baptised as a believer wants to become a member of a “closed membership” Baptist church, he or she must submit to believers' baptism by immersion. Their previous infant baptism is not considered to be "baptism."

This position maintains a traditional baptist concern for a church of intentional and committed believers. Believers' baptism as a demonstration of such commitment and intentionality was one of the main causes for the rise of the Baptist movement. In the contemporary situation this insistence is encouraged by the fact that many so-called "ecumenical" churches are not growing churches, and they seem to show no passionate interest in mission and evangelism.

XII. The Child in the church

With all other churches Baptists are committed to do whatever we can to lighten the load and to ease the burdens that are placed upon the children of the world. Baptists confess God’s love for children, they gratefully recognise that Jesus took children into his arms and blessed them, they appreciate that Jesus used children to teach adults important insights into the nature of the kingdom of God (Mark 10:13-16; Matt 18:3f., 19:13-15; Luke 18:15-17), they recognise that Christ must be sought and can be found as we commit ourselves to safeguard the dignity of children (Mark 9:36f.; Luke 9:47f.). For Baptists there is no question that children are surrounded and protected by the love of God and that they with their parents and friends are part of the family of God.

The question is whether Christian baptism, as it comes to us through the testimony of the Scriptures, is the right way to declare and celebrate that God loves the child and that the children of Christians belong to the church family. Here Baptists prefer to follow the testimony of Scripture which does not link baptism to infants. At the same time, Baptists use other symbols like infant dedication or infant presentation or a thanksgiving service to allow parents to give thanks for the birth of a child and to dedicate themselves to bring their children up in the “ways of the Lord”, to ask for God’s blessings upon the child, and for inviting the church congregation to commit itself to provide a credible Christian community in which children hear the story of Jesus through teaching (Sunday School) and example, and thus create a space in which children can trust Jesus as Lord and saviour and then be baptised on their confession of faith.

Children who are born into a Christian family and thereby into a Christian church fellowship are of course not more loved by God than any other children, but they have the decided advantage of hearing the gospel and being given the space to respond to it.

For Christians there is a difference between the natural family and the natural society into which a child is born without their say, and the church in which a person becomes a member through voluntary faith and baptism, and in which the Christian gladly accepts the call to responsible Christian discipleship.

The dignity of the child is in no way questioned if church membership is reserved for those who have voluntarily and intentionally decided to follow Jesus. Indeed the nature of the church as a community of faith calls for such a distinction.

TL: Kingston, ACT