1

info@9marks.org | www.9marks.org

Contents Editors Note Jonathan Leeman Page 4

WHAT TIES CHURCHES TOGETHER? A Church and Churches: Independence To understand how local churches relate to each other we first need to ask, who holds the keys? By Jonathan Leeman Page 5

A Church and Churches: Integration Local churches have the same Christ, same confession, and same commission. Here are ten practical implications of these connections. By Jonathan Leeman Page 10

Testing the Glue that Binds Churches Together In an allegedly post-denominational age, what binds churches together? Does that glue work? By Bobby Jamieson Page 15

Tools like this are provided by the generous investment of donors.

Each gift to 9Marks helps equip church leaders with a biblical vision and practical resources for displaying Gods glory to the nations through healthy churches.

Donate at: www.9marks.org/donate. Or make checks payable to 9Marks and mail to: 9 Marks, 525 A St. NE Washington, DC 20002

For any gift of $300 ($25/month), youll receive two new 9Marks books published throughout the year as well as advance copies of new 9Marks audio.

All donations to 9Marks are tax-deductible.

2

Cooperative Ministry in the New Testament Share, help, support, sendNew Testament churches cooperated in all these ways and more. We should too. By Chad Brand Page 20

Pastors Forum: Are Denominations Worth it? Answers from Tom Ascol, Tim Cantrell, Timothy Keller, Matt OReilly, Richard D. Phillips, and Carl Trueman Page 24

HOW CAN CHURCHES WORK TOGETHER? When Disaster Strikes: How Other Churches Helped Ours On March 2, 2012, this churchs town was flattened by a tornado. But other area churches sprang to their aid and set an example for all of us. By Toby Jenkins with Cade Campbell Page 27

Why I Pray Publicly for Other Churches Why pray publicly for other churches? To crucify the spirit of competition, to show were on the same team, and to strengthen friendships. By Greg Gilbert Page 29

Churches Cooperating in Pastoring Sometimes shepherds need to get on the phone in order to care together for straying sheep. By Deepak Reju Page 31

Churches Cooperating in Missions You cannot cooperate with everyone in the work of missions, but when you do, you help to clarify the gospel. By Andy Johnson Page 34

Churches Cooperating in Discipline No, most churches dont cooperate in church discipline. Yes, they probably should. And imagine what would happen to Christian nominalism if they did. By Jonathan Leeman Page 37

3

BOOK REVIEWS Book Review: The Imperative of Preaching: A Theology of Sacred Rhetoric By John Carrick Reviewed by David King Page 39

Book Review: Sensing Jesus: Life and Ministry as a Human Being By Zack Eswine Reviewed by Kevin Wilkening Page 42

Book Review: Pastoral Leadership Is By Dave Earley Reviewed by Colin Adams Page 45

Book Review: Brothers, We Are Not Professionals By John Piper Reviewed by Nathan Knight Page 49

Book Review: The Creedal Imperative By Carl Trueman Reviewed by Peter Hess Page 51

Audio Global Missions Today with Zane Pratt Zane Pratt discusses the strange dynamics of cross-cultural missions in a Facebook world. Posted on April 1, 2013 *Listen Online Now

Taking Aim at Everyone with Carl Trueman Mark Dever asks Carl Trueman about holocaust denial, secularization, no creed but the Bible, and everything else under the sun in this far-ranging conversation. Posted on March 1, 2013 *Listen Online Now

* This audio might not be supported by your particular device

4

By Jonathan Leeman

Editors Note Its a strange balance that a pastor must strike. On the one hand, he must fight for his church. He will give it his best daytime hours, his prayerful nights, his affections and tears, his material comforts and sometimes his health, even his most precious friendships.

On the other hand, a pastor should be willing to let it all go. Let it fire him. Let it close its doors if circumstances require. Let the church down the street run the victory lap, even as his congregation fades into the night.

Why this unworldly balance? Because Christs kingdom is made visible in our churches, but Christs kingdom is bigger than any one of our churches. We strive so long as we are given opportunity, but we know that Jesus victory does not finally hang on our little assembly.

It is easy to be territorial as a pastor. You love your church, and who has time to invest in other churches? But part of building a healthy church is knowing how your church should relate to others. Right relationships help your church to be holy internally, to be a good witness outwardly, and to plant a new generation of churches.

In other words, cultivating good relationships between churches helps to fulfill the Great Commission.

The first article in this 9Marks Journal is the one place we let our congregational colors shine. It is important to understand the sense in which your church is independent. But the rest of the issue focuses on cooperation, first in big-picture pieces by Bobby Jamieson and me, and then in a series of topic-specific articles by other brothers.

Chad Brand details a number of ways New Testament churches worked together and challenges us to do the same. Toby Jenkins gives a wonderful testimony of how other local churches served his own in a time of crisis. Greg Gilbert explains why and how he prays for nearby churches on Sunday morningsin his church serviceout loud, like, into a microphone. Deepak Reju, Andy Johnson, and I talk about inter-church cooperation in pastoring, missions work, and discipline. Also, we hope you enjoy the forum on denominations from brothers representing several.

We pray God would be pleased to strengthen each of our churches as he strengthens them together.

5

By Jonathan Leeman

A Church and Churches: Independence What is the relationship between your local church and every other church in the world? In the companion piece to this article, I consider how different churches should integrate together. Here we want to ask what makes each independent.

We can answer that by asking what makes our relationship with fellow church members different from our relationship with Christians who belong to different churches. The biblical call to love, pray for, give to, imitate, perhaps even instruct and rebuke other Christians is hardly restricted to the members of our own church. So what makes the relationship different?

DISCIPLINE AND WHO HOLDS THE KEYS

The short-cut answer is to say that your fellow church members can participate in your excommunication in a way that other Christians cannot. An unresolved offense must be taken to the church (Matt. 18:15-17). The independence of the local church, we might therefore surmise, has something to do with the fact that the local church is where church discipline happens.

But there is a bigger picture here pertaining to who holds the keys of the kingdom, and its worth taking the longer route to catch all the scenery.

The theological champions at the Westminster Assembly spent several days debating who in the post-apostolic age holds the keys that Jesus originally gave to Peter (Matt. 16:19), since they understood that the keys represent, at the very least, the power of excommunication. And the power of excommunication is the highest authority in a church, just as the power of the sword is the highest authority in a nation. All power in a nation derives from the authority to end a life, and, in the same way, all power in the church derives from the authority to remove someone from membership, including the authority to receive members, pick pastors, or adopt a statement of faith. Whoever has the power of excommunication has the power to do those other things, or at least to decide who does.

The majority of Presbyterians at the Assembly argued that presbyteries hold the keys. The few Congregationalists presentthe dissenting brethrenargued that the keys are held by the whole congregation together with the elders. (Thanks to Hunter Powell for the history lesson.)

6

Staring down at Matthew 18:15-20, I would argue with the dissenters that Jesus places the keys squarely in the hands of the local churchwherever two or three are formally gathered in his name. In Jesus narrative of discipline, the ekklesiathe assemblyprovides the last court of appeal when a persons profession does not match his or her life.

Later in the New Testament, we learn that elders should be set apart for teaching and oversight, which suggests they ordinarily lead the church in using those keys. I would even say the church needs the elders to responsibly wield the keys. But finally the keys belong to the entire congregation. No text in the New Testament explicitly links the oversight of the elders with the keys of the kingdom in the manner that Matthew 18 so clearly links the keys with the whole assembly. Elder authority is real, but it is a different kind of authority than congregational authority.

Whether or not you are convinced every member jointly holds the keys together, or just the elders of a church do, what should be clear is that no outside body, whether a presbytery or bishop, intervenes in Matthew 18. The local church alone holds the keys.

The independence of the local church, in short, rests squarely on the fact that it is the local church who holds the keys of the kingdom.

THE KEYS AND THE THINGS OF HEAVEN

So what exactly are these keys of the kingdom for binding and loosing? I have argued elsewhere that the keys represent the authority to build the church on earth on Jesus behalf by declaring what and who belong to the kingdom of heavenwhat is a right confession of the gospel, and who is a right confessor. Certainly, preaching is highly related to the exercise of the keys, and could even be said to form an implicit part of their exercise. But, strictly speaking, I would argue that the exercise of the keys is the pronouncing of a judgment. It is a legal or judicial binding or loosing. It is a churchs decision about what constitutes a right confession and who is a true confessor.

In other words, the keys are put into practice whenever

a church decides upon a confession of faith that will bind all church members, a church admits a member, a church excludes a member.

The holder of the keysthe churchis being called upon to assess a persons life and profession of faith and then to make a heavenly sanctioned and public pronouncement affirming or denying the persons citizenship in the kingdom and inclusion in the church.

The supreme example of this is Jesus interchange with Peter: Jesus asked who they thought he was, Peter made a confession, and then Jesus affirmed both the confession and Peter (flesh and blood did not reveal this to youyou are Peter, and on this rock). The same kind of conversation transpires in Matthew 18, only in reverse. Jesus envisions a situation in which a church gradually determined that the what of a gospel confession does not match the who of a gospel confessor.

What all this means is, each local church is independent from every other church on earth because Christ has given each assembly the authority to declare before the nations the what and the who of the things of heaven.

The local church is not a building. It is not the place where you go once a week to get your spiritual jolt. Its where heaven comes to earth, and the truths of heaven are spoken, and things of heaven get handled, and the people of heaven find life and fellowship. Our churches are embassies of heavens rule scattered across the nations of the earth now.

7

What does all this mean practically?

A CHURCH AFFIRMS WHO REPRESENTS CHRIST

An embassy is a useful metaphor for a local church because an embassy does not make someone a citizen, it affirms someone as a citizen. It stamps the passport when it expires.

An embassy, moreover, makes the rule of one nation visible inside of another nation. You can see the building, the flag, the passports, the ambassadorial staff, the soldiers with guns standing at the embassy gates. Plus, the authority of an embassy is, in a sense, independent within a host nation.

In the same way, the independent authority of the local church makes the rule of Christs kingdom visible on planet earth as it exercises the keys, which it does through baptism and the Lords Supper. The ordinances are what make the receiving and dismissing of members by the authority of the keys visible. Call them Christian passports.

To baptize someone is to identify them by name with the name of the Father, Son, and Spirit. To give someone the Lords Supper is to affirm their membership in the body of our Lord.

Practical implication 1: The ordinances should be practiced in the context of the gathered assembly. If the gathered assembly holds the keys, and if the keys are exercised through the ordinances, then the ordinances should be practiced in the context of the assembly. Baptism and the Lords Supper are not private mystical experiences in which we shut our eyes and feel Jesus special presence. They are corporate and public proclamations of identification and belonging. Together we declare that Gods name is upon us (Matt. 28:19); together we declare our union with Christs death and resurrection (Rom. 6:1-2); together we declare his death and our membership in his body (1 Cor. 11:18-19, 27-33). The ordinances are not for Christian families, youth camps, or even small groups. They are assembly activities.

Practical implication 2: Baptism is ordinarily into membership. With the exception of settings in which a local church does not yet exist (e.g. the Ethiopian Eunuch in Acts 8), it is irresponsible (and unbiblical) to baptize an individualthereby affirming his profession of faith before the nationsand then leave him unaccounted for within a local body. Who will ensure that he remains faithful to his profession? How will this baptismally-affirmed professor be excommunicated if he is not within a church?

Practical implication 3: Christians should belong to local churches. Christians do not have the authority to declare themselves Jesus representatives. The church has this authority, which it ordinarily exercises by dispensing the Lords Supper to its members. (Which is not to say that church cannot provide the Lords Supper to visiting members of other churches for the sake of acknowledging the wider body of Christ.) Plus, maintaining the credibility of ones profession of faith requires a believer to remain under the oversight of a church.

Practical implication 4: Churches should examine those whom they receive as members, and maintain oversight for the sake of meaningful discipline. Who do you say that I am? Jesus asked of Peter. In churches today, too, the elders should interview all prospective candidates for membership. Plus, a church should work hard to make sure it can give an account for the spiritual welfare of every member.

Practical implication 5: Discipleship works best in the framework of accountability, which means discipleship works best in the context of the local assembly. We grow as believers through formative and corrective church disciplineteaching and correction.

8

A CHURCH AFFIRMS A RIGHT CONFESSION

The independence of the local church is also found in the fact that King Jesus has authorized each local assembly to affirm the faith that believers should confess.

Other bodies in church history have written confessions or creeds that are then used to bind churches and what members believefrom the apostolically unique council in Jerusalem in Acts to the council of Nicaea to the Westminster Assembly. But biblically, the legitimate body in a post-apostolic age for exercising the keys in this confession-prescribing fashion is the local church.

Practical implication 6: Churches gather around right preaching of the Word. It is as the church sits under the preaching of the Word and gospel that they learn to exercise the keys responsiblyassessing both the who and the what of the gospel.

Practical implication 7: Churches should establish a clear statement of faith. The very thing which unites a church to all other churchesits confession of gospel faithalso makes each church independent. Since the gathered assembly has been given the keys, every member of the gathered assembly is responsible to affirm a single statement of faith, a responsibility that fits comfortably with the priesthood of all believers. In fact, its this act of corporately affirming a statement of faith (through the ordinances) whereby a group of Christians constitute themselves as a local church.

On the flip side, the fact that a statement of faith in the gospel is what unites a church to every other Christian church suggests that it is wise to employ historical creeds or confessions in its official statement of faith. We must independently affirm a statement, but it should be a statement that is (or at least could be) broadly shared by Christians throughout the ages.

Practical implication 8: Churches should choose their pastors. In Galatians 1, Paul rebukes the churches of Galatia for abandoning the gospel. He does not address the elders or pastors, he addresses the congregations themselves. They are finally responsible for ensuring that right doctrine is preached, which, by implication, suggests that the assembly should have final say in affirming who the teachers of the Word are.

A CHURCH ADMINISTERS THE GREAT COMMISSION

Finally, the independence of the local church is found in the fact that King Jesus has commissioned each local assembly to fulfill the great commission and to equip its saints for this task. Of course this does not mean that a church does this apart from cooperating with other churches, but the local church is the primary location where the work of the Great Commission gets done, and which has the independent authority to administer this work through the ordinances.

Practical implication 9: Church membership should be treated as an office. It is a job. It is not a casual connection with a voluntary society like a country club, where you come for the benefits so long as the dues are not too high. It is citizenship, and citizenship is an office of governance. Once a church has affirmed an individual as a Jesus Representative and a member, that member becomes responsible for overseeing other confessors of the faith.

Picture a persons passport getting stamped at an embassy desk, and then walking around to the other side the desk in order to take part in the work of the embassy. In other words, part of fulfilling the Great Commission for an individual Christian is to take responsibility for other church members, that the keys might be exercised responsibly.

Yes, you, Christian, are jointly responsible for every other church member in the room on Sunday morning, and whether or not they continue to walk in the faith. So get to know them! It is as we accept this formal responsibility for the who and the what of other disciples that we ourselves grow as disciples and help others to grow.

9

In short, responsibility and authority belong together, just like a custodian with the responsibility of cleaning a building must possess the authority of the building keys in order to open all the doors. Christ gives every Christian the responsibility to make disciples in Matthew 28. Wonderfully, he had already given every Christian the joint authority to fulfill this responsibility by giving the whole assembly the keys back in chapters 16 and 18.

Practical implication 10: A churchs basic work is to equip the saints to do the work of this office. It is true that conferences and books and Christian friends can be wonderfully used to equip Christians for the work of ministry. But the local church and its officers will be uniquely called to account for such work (Eph. 4:11-12; Heb. 13:17).

CONCLUSION

Churches should work together to fulfill the great commission because they call upon the same Lord and share a common gospel confession. This is the argument of the companion article.

At the same time, the fact that Christ has placed the keys of the kingdom into the hands of the whole assembly means that every church has an independent authority to exercise the authority of Christ in the what of gospel confessions and the who of making disciples.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Jonathan Leeman, a member of Capitol Hill Baptist Church, serves as the editorial director at 9Marks and is the author of Church Membership: How the World Knows Who Represents Jesus. You can follow him on Twitter.

10

By Jonathan Leeman

A Church and Churches: Integration What is the relationship between your local church and every other church in the world? In the companion piece to this article, I consider what makes different local churches independent from one another. Here we consider how they should integrate.

To understand how and why our churches should cooperate, it is worth taking a second to step inside the U. S. Embassy in Tehran on November 4, 1979, while the ominous storm of angry Muslim students brews just outside the embassy gates. You probably know that the mob eventually broke into the compound, and fifty-two Americans spent 444 days as hostages in the Iran Hostage Crisis. Yet dont focus on what eventually happened; focus on what it would have been like to be inside the embassy while the fury was still building. What would you be doing in those moments?

Presumably, you would be on the phone in a frantic search for friends. The U. S. State Department, the nearby Canadian Embassy, the Swedish Embassy in town, even sympathizers in the Iranian governmentyou would be grabbing for whatever friends you could find.

What you would not do is assume that your little embassy compound, floating like a storm-embattled boat in the middle of the seething urban sea that was Tehran, sat fine all by itself. You would not try to go it alone! as if the fate of the U.S. governments diplomatic mission in the world depended upon your embassys shoulders.

Yet strangely, this is the attitude that many of our local churches maintain as we seek to undertake Gods mission in the world. We know we are sojourners and aliens. We know other embassies and friends are out there. We know the world, the flesh, and the devil oppose us like a bloodthirsty mobfor your sake we are being killed all the day long (Rom. 8:36). But too easily our churches undertake Christs mission all by our lonesome. We go it alone.

Just consider: does your church cooperate with other local churches in evangelism and missions, in discipline, in counseling, in mercy ministry, in prayer? Or, honestly, does it do its work fairly independently?

11

A BETTER APPRECIATION FOR FAMILY TIES Open the Bible and you will find a better appreciation for family ties among the apostolic churches. They shared love and greetings:

All the churches greet you (Rom. 16:16).

The churches of Asia send you greetings (1 Cor. 16:9).

All the saints greet you (2 Cor. 13:13; also, Eph. 4:22).

I have heard of your faith in the Lord Jesus and your love toward all the saints (Eph. 1:15; also Col. 1:4).

They shared preachers and missionaries:

With him we are sending the brother who is famous among all the churches for his preaching of the gospel (2 Cor. 8:18).

Beloved, it is a faithful thing you do in all your efforts for these brothers, strangers as they are, who testified to your love before the church (3 John 5-6a).

They supported one another financially with joy and thanksgiving:

At present, however, I am going to Jerusalem bringing aid to the saints. For Macedonia and Achaia have been pleased to make some contribution for the poor among the saints at Jerusalem (Acts 15:25-26).

For the ministry of this service is not only supplying the needs of the saints but is also overflowing in many thanksgivings to God (2 Cor. 9:12; also, 2 Cor. 8:1-2).

They imitated one another in how to live the Christian life:

you became an example to all the believers in Macedonia and in Achaia (1 Thess. 1:7).

For you, brothers, became imitators of the churches of God in Christ Jesus that are in Judea (1 Thess. 2:14).

These apostolic testimonies of shared love and support between the earliest churches are matched by apostolic exhortations. They were told to greet one another:

Greet the church in their house (Rom. 16:5).

They were instructed to love one another by caring for one another financially:

Now concerning the collection for the saints: as I directed the churches of Galatia, so you also are to do. On the first day of every week, each of you is to put something aside and store it up, as he may prosper, so that there will be no collecting when I come. And when I arrive, I will send those whom you accredit by letter to carry your gift to Jerusalem (1 Cor. 16:1-3).

So give proof before the churches of your love and of our boasting about you to these men (2 Cor. 8:24).

They were cautioned about whom to receive as teachers:

Do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world (1 John 4:1).

For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not confess the coming of Jesus Christ in the flesh. Such a one is the deceiver and the antichrist. Watch yourselves (2 John 7-8a).

12

They were exhorted to pray for other churches and Christians:

To that end keep alert with all perseverance, making supplication for all the saints (Eph. 6:18).

They were exhorted to imitate other churches in steadfastness and faith:

Therefore we ourselves boast about you in the churches of God for your steadfastness and faith in all your persecutions and in the afflictions that you are enduring (2 Thess. 1:4).

The topic of the relationship between churches gets difficult, of course, because it involves different ideas of authority between churches, which is where denominations divide from one another.

But wherever you come down on the question of authority between churches, it is important to recognize that our local congregations should in some measure be integrated with one another. And your church will best fulfill the Great Commission when its life is connected in relationship and awareness with other churches.

Its worth seeing several things churches share in common and the practical implications these connections have for our corporate lives.

WE SHARE THE SAME CHRIST

Notice, first, that different Christians share the same Lord and Christ, as comes through in Pauls greeting to the church in Corinth: To the church of God that is in Corinthcalled to be saints together with all those who in every place call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, both their Lord and ours (1 Cor. 1:2; cf. 2 Cor. 1:1).

Different churches call upon the same Christ. They are possessed by the same Lord.

Think about what this means: the fact that we have the same Christ, Lord, and King means our many churches are bound together as a distinct body politic, or kingdom, or nation. Just as a common parent makes for familial unity, so a common Lord makes for a kind of political unity. Paul can therefore describe the Ephesians as fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God (Eph. 2:19). Fellow citizens belong to a common nation.

Different denominational traditions make this political unity visible differently. Connectionalist churches put it into practice through presbyteries and bishoprics. As a congregationalist, I find the metaphor of an embassy useful here because this Christian nation is actually spread throughout the nations of the world, and every individual Christian should be accountable to his or her own embassy. But whichever polity we adopt, we can all agree that churches at least invisibly share a kind of political or national unity together because of our one King.

Practical implication 1: All Christians should care about how our churches are structured, since polity makes this political unity visible. And polity is how Christians are made effectively accountable to our common Lord. Polity is the tool that disciplines us for righteousness.

Practical implication 2: Like a nation, our names and reputations are all bound together, even when we belong to different denominations. Do you know how obnoxious Americans overseas have given rise to the concept of the ugly American? In the same way, when one Christian church presents a poor witness in the city, every Christian church in that city suffers. When one church presents a positive witness, every church benefits. We therefore share an interest in one anothers spiritual welfare.

13

Practical implication 3: Since we share an interest in one anothers spiritual welfare, we should pray for one another, encourage one another, financially support one another as opportunity allows, and generally do what we can to support one anothers ministries. This in turn means there should be an openness to informal relationships with other churches, particularly between church leaders. Having knowledgeable relationships facilitates more specific prayer, encouragement, and aid.

WE SHARE THE SAME CONFESSION

Different Christian churches also share the same gospel confession, even when they belong to different denominations. Think of how Paul exhorted the churches of Galatia: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed (Gal. 1:2, 9).

John, too, expected every church to embrace a right doctrine of the incarnation (1 John 4:1-3). Practical implication 4: Churches should partner in learning from one another and teaching one another. If you and I believe in the same truth, might we not both possess some insight to help one another understand that truth better? I listed several examples above of how the earliest churches did this in the sharing of preachers and missionaries.

In our day, there are lots of ways this can be done: through attending or hosting conferences; through supporting seminary education; through working to equip other church leaders with biblical understanding in a host of ways, from writing books to starting a local ministerial association (to supporting 9Marks!).

Practical implication 5: Churches should work to learn from other churches from across time. The great creeds have something to teach us, as do the various controversies of the past. My church often recites a historic creed on Sunday morning.

Generally, pastors should teach their people to be readers and to be thoughtful. And churches should generally care more about history than we might expect from the population at large.

Practical implication 6: Churches should encourage one another to conform to the same pattern of life, just as the apostolic churches imitated one another (1 Thess. 1:7; 2:4; 2 Thess. 1:4). Paul, sure enough, sought to remind [the Corinthian church] of my ways in Christ, as I teach them everywhere in every church (1 Cor. 4:7); and he often insisted on a common rule in all the churches (1 Cor. 14:33b-34; also, 7:17, 11:16, etc.).

This implication, too, points to the value of multi-church conferences, books, or ministerial associations. But it particularly highlights the need for pastors to build relationships with one another beyond their own churches, as they seek to grow in wisdom in the nitty-gritty areas of pastoral practice. How do you deal with this tough pastoral counseling situation? I hope you have a pastor friend or two to call, or even a group with whom to discuss it.

Practical implication 7: Churches should work to supply capable pastors or at least supply-preachers to struggling churches who lack them. I know of a number of churches who, when they work to plant or revitalize another church, agree to pay the pastors salary in that other church for the first couple of years. And they do so without asking to exercise any authority over that other congregation! It is a gift.

WE SHARE THE SAME COMMISSION

Different churches also share the same calling and commission. All of them are called to be saints or holy-ones (1 Cor. 1:2). All of them are commissioned to make disciples (Matt. 28:18-19). All of them are tasked with guarding the name and reputation of Christ through church discipline (see Matt. 18:15-20).

14

Practical implication 8: Churches should help one another with membership and discipline. As a congregationalist, I do not believe one church can exercise authority over another. But I have watched our church work well together with other congregations in the transfer of members, as well as in the exercise of discipline. For instance, when one individual whom our church had disciplined tried to join a nearby church with whom we have a relationship, that church turned to us for guidance. Our church has done the same when individuals who were disciplined by other congregations tried to join our church. Our church does not believe that it is bound by the other churchs decision, but we would be foolish not to make enquiries. Working together in matters of membership and discipline helps us make and oversee Christs disciples and so fulfill the Great Commission.

Practical implication 9: Churches should work together in missions and evangelism. This can happen locally, as when our church partners with nearby churches (from different denominations) to lead evangelistic Bible studies at lunchtime in the business district. Or it can happen nationally and globally, as when the churches of the Southern Baptist Convention pool their money to send missionaries overseas.

Practical implication 10: Churches can partner together in their mercy ministry work. Pauls example of collecting from a number of churches to support the church in Jerusalem, as mentioned above, provides the most obvious biblical example. Churches today also do well to look for ways to support sister churches with fewer resources at their disposal. This helps Christs kingdom and serves the Great Commission.

Cooperating in, compiling, and coordinating resources for mercy ministry among non-Christian neighbors can also help churches fulfill the Great Commission and live as holy ones who are salt and light in the world.

CONCLUSION

It was not until 2:15 in the morning of December 18, 1944, that the orders came for the 422 and 423 regiments of 106th Division of the U. S. Army to retreat westward toward St. Vith, Belgium from their position in the German forests of Schnee Eifel. By then it was too late. The German Army had successfully executed a pincer movement, surrounding and cutting off the two American regiments. By the next day over 7000 American soldiers found themselves as German prisoners of war.

Now imagine an army regiment trying to do their work alone, without relating to other regiments or the larger division or battalion. It would be foolish.

The army analogy breaks down insofar as the division or battalion command belongs to Christ in heaven. But whether or not you are a congregationalist or a connectionalist, it should be clear that the work of our churches depends upon other churches, like one regiment depending upon another.

How can your church practically support the work of other local churches?

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Jonathan Leeman, a member of Capitol Hill Baptist Church, serves as the editorial director at 9Marks and is the author of Church Membership: How the World Knows Who Represents Jesus. You can follow him on Twitter.

*

*

*

http://cn.9marks.org

9Marks.org Now in Chinese

15

By Bobby Jamieson

Testing the Glue that Binds Churches Together Are denominations dying? That seems to be the common wisdom. Certainly the mainline denominations are bleeding out; people are leaving those churches en masse. But what about denominations of evangelical churches that are holding fast or growing?

Im no demographer, so I cant give you data to test the idea that denominations have seen better days. But this common line does seem to be picking up a genuine trend that deserves attentionnamely, that relatively new ways of relating church to church are at least complementing, and sometimes replacing, traditional denominational structures.

What follows is based on anecdotal, entirely unprofessional observation of (American) evangelical churches. But my goal in this article isnt so much quantitative analysis as qualitative description. I aim to describe and theologically evaluate a handful of glues which bind pastors and churches together, and offer pastors a few tools for thinking through who to partner with, and how.

WHAT HAS CHANGED?

First, though, we need to ask: what has changed? Why do new ways of relating pastor-to-pastor or church-to-church seem to be cropping up, and even competing with older structures?

There are probably a number of reasons: the theological downgrade of the old denominations, the ever-growing Western skepticism toward all forms of authority, even the shrinking of the globe due to revolutions in communication technology. Just consider this last factor and the rise of the internet. Sure, many of the connections the internet fosters are weak tieslike Facebook friends and Twitter followers. Yet communications technology gives those weak ties the chance of becoming stronger ties. And it allows us to sustain stronger ties over distances that wouldve been unthinkable a generation ago. With the rise of communication technology, traditional denominational structures arent the only show in townor even the leading onefor connecting pastors and churches.

Further, by democratizing access to information, the internet has also democratized ecclesial identity formation. Previously models of church were inherited, now theyre mixed and matched. Certainly plenty of pastors throughout the ages have read widely. But Id guess that today more pastors are influenced by figures outside their denomination than was true in former generations. Eighteenth century Baptists may have read Jonathan Edwards, but they couldnt download his sermons for free. Bottom line: for many pastors and churches, informal ties to leaders and movements are growing stronger, and formal ties to denominations are growing weaker.

16

AN INDEPENDENT CONVERSATION

In speaking about churches as independent entities that can be glued together in a variety of ways, I am, of course, speaking as a congregationalist. That is, I dont believe that the church on earth exists in any formal, institutional manifestation over and above the local church.

Many congregations, though, do belong to such an extra-local structure. Roman Catholicism is one kind, Eastern Orthodoxy another, Episcopalianism another, and Presbyterianism still another. In all these polities, the local church is formally accountable to an outside individual or entity. We call these connectional polities to recognize that this authoritative connection is an intrinsic part of what it means, on this understanding, to be the church.

A connectional polity necessarily enforces a certain confession and practice: someone is able to say this is out of bounds to a local church. This means that a connectional churchs very identity is wrapped up in its association with the broader communion in a way that isnt the case for independent churches.

Connectional polities have their own promises and pitfalls, but I wont address them here. Thats not because I think theyre unbiblicalthough I dobut because most 9Marks.org readers belong to churches that are formally independent. To put it crassly, connectional polities more or less determine your friendsor enemies!for you. On the other hand, independent churches have to look up and ask, Who do we want to associate with, and how? Hence my focus on the latter.

WHY SHOULD CHURCHES COOPERATE? FOR OUTREACH AND INREACH

In order to describe and assess what holds churches together, we should first think a bit about why they seek to hold together. Jonathan Leemans piece A Church and Churches: Integration offers several exegetical and theological reasons for why churches should band together. Here I want to take a snapshot from another anglea practical one. For what practical purposes should churches attempt to stick together?

As I see it, there are basically two: to fulfill the great commission, and to both receive and supply what is lacking in the life of a local church. You could call these two goals outreach and, to use some evangelical-ese, inreach.

Outreach: The great commission is bigger than any local church (Matt. 28:18-20). To evangelize all peoples and establish churches across the globe requires that churches cooperate. And the same is true when it comes to evangelizing our local communities.

Inreach: On the other hand, churches should also seek to aid in supplying each others needs as they have opportunity (e.g., 2 Cor. 8-9). If youve got a counseling situation thats spiraling out of control, I hope theres a wise pastor friend across town you can call. If your church is devastated by a natural disaster, I hope other local churches will rally around you.

TESTING A FEW TYPES OF GLUE

These two goals of outreach and inreach form the backdrop against which Ill asses a few types of glue that hold churches together. While each of these types of glue can be considered on its own, many connections between churches, especially denominational ones, will combine several of them. Think of a denomination as Super Glue, with some of these individual glues as the ingredients.

17

Ethnic Identity

The first kind of glue to consider is ethnic identitynote the scare quotes. I dont mean ethnicity per se, though ethnicity is a very powerful glue. Instead, I am using the term metaphorically to refer to churches that share a tradition so culturally thick that it functions like an ethnic identity.

This is many peoples experience of church life in the Southern Baptist Convention. Beginning in the mid-twentieth century, the Southern Baptist Convention became a centralized provider of an all-encompassing church culture: church holidays, Sunday School lessons, midweek programs, music, and more. SBC churches became like McDonalds: you could pop into any one of them, any week of the year, and know exactly what was on the menu.

This kind of ethnic identity fosters an intense brand loyalty. On the one hand, that loyalty extends naturally to the thousands of other churches which share the same programmatic profile. Hence many Southern Baptists fierce devotion to the denominations central mechanism, the Cooperative Program.

On the other hand, this brand loyalty is a double-edged sword. For one, the identity itself is only as biblical as the content of all the programs. Further, the very emphasis on universal, standardized programs can foster a consumer mindset rather than responsible, relational ministry. Finally, this kind of identity can foster a hermetically sealed subculture that finds it difficult to adapt to new people, new places, and new times.

Personality

A second kind of glue to assess is personalityusually the personality of a key pastor who is either a formal or informal denominational head. Sometimes attachment to a personality can lead one into a new denomination. More commonly, this personality glue shows up in megachurches that either birth or effectively become their own denominations. An example of the former would be the Willow Creek Association. For the latter, think of any multi-site church that has campuses not just across its city, but across the country and beyond.

Again, in these kinds of relationships theres more to the story than personality. Theres always some shared doctrine and practice, on which more below. But often, if you take away the big personality the center wont hold, which means personality is an active ingredient in the glue.

On the one hand, I dont want to deny that God can use singular personalities to achieve big thingsJohn Wesleys name heads that list. But on the other hand, attaching yourself and your church to a personality puts you in danger of multiplying not just another mans fruitfulness, but also his errors. When a group of churches identity derives more from a single man than from a more objective traditionsay, a time-tested confession of faiththose churches may be building on pretty thin ice.

If your church is attached to a big personality, how many church members were initially drawn, at least in part, because of your connection to the big man? What happens if he falls into sin or serious error? Who or what holds him accountable? What happens if the big personalitys interests conflict with the local churchs? Who should members side with?

Theological Vision

A third kind of glue is what Ill call theological vision. As I said above, in this internet age pastors and churches often find they have more in common with churches of other denominations that share their overall theological vision than with churches in their denomination that dont.

Conferences like Together for the Gospel and the Gospel Coalition both build on, and in different ways seek to foster, this kind of interdenominational unity. Once every two years, T4G casts a thick theological vision for ministry and

18

encourages pastors to build friendships across secondary divides. This is evidenced in its affirmations and denials. TGC presents a slightly broader spectrum, creating more of a village green feel on its website and at its conferencethough this village green is fenced in by robust doctrinal and practical commitments. Further, while T4G is merely a three-day event every two years, TGC has begun to foster cooperative structures with a life of their own, such as their regional chapters.

Because of the shared theological vision which they embody, these two conferences have become shorthand for a pretty long list of doctrinal and practical commitments. If someone identifies with either of these events, you can take a lot of common ground for grantedcommon ground in which real partnerships can quickly sprout.

How well can these conferences foster cooperative outreach and inreach between churches? Probably the best thing they do is encourage pastors, and help pastors get to know each other. You might not have known there was a likeminded pastor fifteen minutes up the road until you met him in Louisville or Orlando. But if a conference helps you make that connection, over time your relationship can organically grow into a fuller partnership between your churches.

On the other hand, cooperation based on a shared theological vision has its limits. The cooperation T4G and TGC can foster necessarily excludes ecclesiological distinctives like the sacraments and politythe very things which make a local church what it is. And since the goal of the great commission is planting and nurturing churches, this means that a theological vision by itself isnt enough to foster long-term cooperation for great commission goals.

NEEDED: AN ECCLESIAL VISION

To foster long-term cooperation toward great commission goals, what you need is not merely a theological vision but an ecclesial vision. In order to work with another church to plant churches, you need to agree about what it is youre trying to plant. You need to agree on the answer to questions like:

What is baptism and who are its proper subjects? What are the qualifications for church membership? Is (believers) baptism on the list? How should a church be structured? Who has final authority in matters of membership and discipline? How do we decide what to do, and how to do it, in corporate worship? What is a pastors fundamental job description?

Of course, you can agree about such matters but disagree about essential areas of theology, and then youre back to square one. Thats why an ecclesial vision requires theological agreement toomore precisely, enough shared theology to constitute a church together.

MULTIPLE LAYERS OF PARTNERSHIPS

The problem is, when many pastors stroll through the denominational grocery aisles, they dont see any visions on offer they particularly resonate with, whether theological or ecclesial. Or perhaps their preferred vision is just one among many that are tolerated, and by no means the majority view.

If theres a traditional denomination or network of churches which perfectly matches your theological and ecclesial commitments, the decision to link arms is a no-brainer. But what do you do if theres no perfect match on offer?

Id encourage you to think in terms of multiple layers of partnerships. Instead of seeking one all-encompassing identity to wrap your church in, think about multiple overlapping networks.

19

To begin: What other churches in your area do you have a strong relationship with? Or even just a friendship with their pastor? What formal or informal ways can you partner with them? If they disagree about ecclesial distinctives, you can still meet for fellowship, supply some of each others needs, and to some degree cooperate in local outreach.

If other local churches share your ecclesial vision, how can you build your friendships into a more durable partnership? Can you organize pulpit supply to fill a need and train young preachers? Or form a regular pastors fraternal where you get into the nitty gritty of shepherding issues? Or even fund a church plant together?

Those are two overlapping local layers. In addition to these local layers, what about a larger scale denomination? Local and larger partnerships can complement each other rather than competing with each other. You may not love everything you see in a big-tent denomination. But if theres enough basic theological and ecclesial agreement, that big-tent denomination may be able to multiply your churchs efforts for the great commission in a way that outpaces a merely informal relationship.

Further, some larger networks or denominations serve complementary goals. For example, plenty of churches are dually aligned with Acts29 and the SBC. Many brothers I know partner with Acts29 for the coaching and encouragement, and with the SBC in order to support global missions and pastor training.

My point is simply that relationships between churches are not an all-or-nothing affair. They can be more or less formal. They can be local or global. They can focus on planting and building churches, or more broadly on promoting gospel work throughout your city. And you can invest differently in these partnerships depending on your churchs resources, other options for cooperating with likeminded churches, and the needs of your community.

THREE ENCOURAGEMENTS

I want to conclude with three brief encouragements for pastors. First, if youre feeling lonely and isolated, look first to your fellow elders. Do you have fellow elders in the first place? If not, let your loneliness in ministry spur you to patiently lead your flock toward adopting the biblical model of multiple shepherds. And if you do have multiple elders but still feel isolated, consider how you might spread around the shepherding load.

Second, if you can only pick one place to invest, build around a shared ecclesial vision. If theres only one other pastor in your town who agrees with your theology and ecclesiology, build into each other and your churches. Work together to raise up other likeminded churches, and to put good resources in other pastors hands.

Certainly meeting with brothers who have shared theology can be an encouragement and lead to practical partnerships. But for those partnerships to serve great commission ends over time, they have to build on shared ecclesial DNA. So multiply your networking efforts by focusing on partnerships which could, by Gods grace, result in new and renewed churches.

Finally, be willing to give more than you receive. Dont judge a denomination or network only by what it can give you and your church. Instead, be willing to invest for the sake of others. The payoff may happen in your city or across the world, next year or in the next generation.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Bobby Jamieson is assistant editor for 9Marks, a member of Third Avenue Baptist Church in Louisville, Kentucky, and the author of Sound Doctrine: How a Church Grows in the Love and Holiness of God (Crossway, 2013). You can follow him on Twitter.

20

By Chad Brand

Cooperative Ministry in the New Testament Are churches independent or interdependent? Id argue that the New Testament answer is both. That is, local churches are not subject to the authority of any external body or individual. And yet in order to fulfill their ministries, they must cooperate with each other in tangible ways. This article will explore New Testament precedents for cooperative ministry between local churches.

PETER AND JOHN IN SAMARIA

In Acts 8 Peter and John travel to Samaria. Philip the evangelist had been engaged in a great ministry there. When the apostles in Jerusalem hear of this work, they dispatch Peter and John to the city (Acts 8:14).

We ought not to see this as a presumptuous act on the part of the Jerusalem apostles, but rather as their glad participation in and assistance to the new Samaritan Christian experience. The new work was endorsed, received, and enthusiastically participated in by the whole church.1 Upon arriving, Peter and John pray for them, and the Samaritans then receive the gift of the Holy Spirit (8:17). After the Spirit falls upon the Samaritans, Peter and John return to Jerusalem after first preaching in other Samaritan villages (8:25), and even Philip is led by an angel to leave in order to witness to the Ethiopian eunuch (8:26-39).

The Jerusalem church did not attempt to govern the Samaritans from afar, but rather joined in the work in this new location, not to supervise it, but only to share with it what it had to give.

SENDING BARNABAS TO ANTIOCH

A second example of cooperative ministry concerns a church that will itself later commit to cooperative work. The stoning of Stephen had sparked a wave of persecution of the Jerusalem Christians (Acts 8:1-3). That wave of animosity sent many Christians packing out of Jerusalem to other places. Fear of reprisal, however, did not cause them to be silent about their faith. Instead, they became powerful evangelists for the cause of Christ in places such as Phoenicia, Cyprus, and Antioch, speaking the message to no one except Jews (Acts 11:19). Some daring men of Cyprus and Cyrene took a different approach in Antioch and preached the gospel to Gentiles. This was not an innovation, since Peter had already done the same thing at the house of Cornelius; but it is still the case that evangelism of the Gentiles was uncommon before this experiment. Luke writes that the Lords hand was with them, and a large number who believed turned to the

21

Lord (Acts 11:21 HCSB). Again, the Jerusalem church heard about this evangelistic effort and sent a favored son, Barnabas, to visit.

Sending Barnabas was an important decision. Had the Jerusalem Christians sent someone who might have been more questioning about Gentile conversions (and we know from later texts that there were such persons), this new work might have been damaged in its infancy.2 There might have developed two versions of Christianity from the very start due to polarizing attitudes about the first Gentile church. But they made the right choice. Barnabas was already known as an encourager, and in addition, he was a Cypriot Jew, so he would likely be sensitive to such a situation (4:36-37).

After arriving and being encouraged about this new fellowship, Barnabas exhorted them to remain true to the Lord with a firm resolve of heart (11:24 HCSB). Barnabas then traveled to Tarsus and fetched Saul to return with him to Antioch, and the two of them met with the church and taught large numbers for a year.

Certainly it is the case that Barnabas was sent by Jerusalem to check out this novel situationa truly Gentile church. It was only natural for the Jerusalem church to show such an interest.3 Barnabas was sent to advise the Antiochenes and undoubtedly to report back to Jerusalem. But it is clear that Jerusalem did not micromanage the situation. Barnabas was not an apostle, and it is likely that Jerusalem did not believe an apostle had to go, since an apostle had already inaugurated Gentile Christianity with Cornelius.

Further, Barnabas took it upon himself to bring Saul (Paul) to Antioch to help him. Perhaps he had already heard of Pauls growing interest in Gentile evangelism.4 That itself may have raised some eyebrows in Jerusalem, since earlier they had eyed him with suspicion (9:27), but again, they did not interfere in the situation. They had sent someone to help the new church, thus demonstrating their desire to help in any way they could, but those helpers stayed as the teachers only for a year and did not represent a permanent interference from Jerusalem in the Antioch church. It also appears that Paul and Barnabas moved their membership to Antioch. They were obviously not the permanent pastors there, but it was to this church that they returned after missionary endeavors, making this their base of operations for ministry.

THE JERUSALEM COUNCIL

The so-called Jerusalem Council constitutes a third time in which the Jerusalem church makes a contribution to other churches. Some men from Judea came to Antioch and were causing trouble. There is no evidence that the Jerusalem church had sent them. The church at Antioch sent Paul and Barnabas to Jerusalem to consult with the Christians there concerning the matter (Acts 15:2-3). This conference was initiated by Antioch, not by Jerusalem, so that this was not a matter of the home church dictating policy unsolicited.5 The Jerusalem church met, with elders, apostles, and the other members of the church all participating (15:4, 12, 22). The church in Jerusalem decided to send a letter to Antioch, answering their questions and making minimalist suggestions to them (to put no greater burden on you than these necessary things). They sent the letter to the brothers of the churches in question, not to the pastors (15:23). When the church at Antioch received the letter, they received it with joy because of its encouragement (15:31).

Several things are clear from this passage. One, this was not an episcopal mandate since it arose from questions raised by the church at Antioch and sent by messenger to Jerusalem. The apostles, of course, had multi-church authority, but only used that authority in situations where it was necessary. Their general tendency was to allow local churches to work out their own issues.

Two, this was not the first presbytery meeting, in the sense meant by Presbyterians.6 The only persons present were Paul and Barnabas from Antioch and the brothers, elders, and apostles of the Jerusalem church. For this to be a meeting of the presbytery, the churches of Syria, Cilicia, and Galatia would have needed representation. In all that took place congregational involvement and action are present at every turn.7 Yet, at the same time, the Jerusalem church is involved in assisting the churches of Syria and Cilicia in solving a problem.

22

FINANCIAL SUPPORT, PERSONAL HELP, AND TEAM MINISTRY

The New Testament demonstrates other kinds of cooperative ministry as well. Financial support for other churches factors highly in several of Pauls letters (Rom. 15:26; 1 Cor. 16:1; 2 Cor. 8-9), and in Acts (Act 11:27-30). In Acts 11 Paul and Barnabas take the collection gathered by the believers in Antioch and bring it to Jerusalem. This is probably the year AD 46, as Josephus relates that a famine hit Judea especially hard that year, and this visit probably corresponds to Pauls statement in Galatians 2:1-10 about his going to Jerusalem because of a revelation (see Acts 11:28).8 The church at Antioch would later (Acts 15) seek help from the Jerusalem church in solving a dispute, but here, earlier on, the Antioch believers contribute to the physical needs of their brethren to the south.

Later, on Pauls third missionary journey, he is deeply concerned again about financial needs among the Jerusalem Christians. Each letter he wrote on that journey mentions the problem (Rom. 15:26; 1 Cor. 16:1; 2 Cor. 8-9). In Romans 15:26 Paul refers to the gift already given by the Macedonian and Achaian Christians as a koinonia, literally, a fellowship. The word can be translated as contribution, but there is certainly an allusion to the words common use in Paul to denote the loving intimacy of the Christian community.9 Paul solicits the help of every Christian church he can in coming to the aid of their brothers and sisters in Jerusalem. Churches are to take opportunity to help other churches when the need arises.

In Romans 16:1-2 Paul commends Phoebe, who is from Cenchrea, to the church in Rome and encourages the Roman Christians to receive her and assist her in any way they can. Paul refers to her as a servant, (diakonon), which could either mean that she was a great worker from Cenchrea, or that she was a deaconess.10 It is likely that Phoebe carried this letter to the Roman church, and so Paul is introducing her to them. He commends her to them and encourages them to receive her ministry. He also urges them to assist her in any way possible. We simply do not know the reasons why Paul selected her to carry the letter. She may have been making the journey to Rome for other reasons, business or otherwise, and so Paul simply asks her to do him this service. What is apparent is that she will have some opportunity to serve the Roman church while she is there, and they will have an opportunity to minister to her. This is an example of someone from one church going to another church to do works of service.11

In a similar way, Timothy assisted Paul with his work in Derbe and Lystra (Acts 16:1-5). Timothy was from Lystra, was probably converted during Pauls first missionary journey, and had been ministering in both Lystra and the nearby town of Iconium, as is clear from the statement in the text that the brothers from both Lystra and Iconium spoke highly of him (Acts 16:2 HCSB).12 This already shows that this man, though he was likely a member of the church at Lystra, had also been serving in another church which was not his own. Now Paul enlists his aid in ministry from town to town, and so they engaged in a ministry together through which the churches were strengthened (16:5 HCSB). Here again is a man who is not an apostle, but who will have an extremely active ministry through the coming years, serving churches all over the region.

Paul enlisted others as well to his ministry cause, including Luke. In Acts 16 Paul reaches the city of Troas, and here, for the first time, the author of the book uses the first person plural (we) in recounting the narrative, since Luke joined Paul at Troas.13 Troas is likely Lukes home church and now he becomes another traveling companion with Paul and a member of the ministry team. A careful reading of the account makes it clear that Luke accompanied the missionaries to the city of Philippi, but then appears to have been left by Paul in Philippi, since the we section ends as the others head on to Thessalonica (Acts 17:1) and only resumes when Paul returns to Philippi (20:6).

Paul likely left Luke there so that he could help the church that now included Lydia, the Philippian jailer, and others, grow and achieve stability. Paul himself could not remain since he had already been arrested there and imprisoned by the authorities. That the church achieved stability is clear from the opening lines of Pauls letter to the Philippian church, in which he greets the church, together with its overseers and deacons (Phil 1:1). Once again, we see that a person who was a member of one church, Luke from Troas, could engage in ministry outside of his own congregation, and yet still not supplant the ministry or leadership of that local congregation.

23

INDEPENDENT YET INTERDEPENDENT

I could adduce more examples from the New Testament, but this ought to be enough to establish the point. The early churches were independent bodies under the Lordship of Christ, but they were also interdependent.

They assisted one another in ministry, they sought advice from one another when faced with difficult situations, and they sent money to help one another when there was a need. They sent and received ministries from individuals from other churches, assisted in pastoral training one of another, and in general were interdependent congregations which, though they stood on their own feet on most occasions, were always willing both to give and receive ministry and assistance when it was agreeable both to the sending and receiving churches. Whatever institutional form it takes, churches today should work to assist each other and further the work of the gospel in these same ways.

Finally, be willing to give more than you receive. Dont judge a denomination or network only by what it can give you and your church. Instead, be willing to invest for the sake of others. The payoff may happen in your city or across the world, next year or in the next generation.

1 John B. Polhill, Acts, The New American Commentary, ed. Ray Clendenen (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1992), 218.

2 F. F. Bruce, The Book of Acts, The New International Commentary on the New Testament, ed. Gordon Fee (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1954), 240.

3 Polhill, Acts, 271.

4 Richard N. Longenecker, Acts, The Expositors Bible Commentary, vol. 9, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1981), 402.

5 Daniel Akin, The Single-Elder-Led Church: The Bibles Witness to a Congregational, Single-Elder-Led Polity, in Perspectives on Church Government: Five Views of Polity, ed. Chad Owen Brand and R. Stanton Norman (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2004), 31.

6 Robert L. Reymond, The Presbytery-Led Church: Presbyterian Church Government, in Perspectives on Church Government: Five Views of Polity, ed. Chad Owen Brand and R. Stanton Norman (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2004), 95-109.

7 Akin, The Single-Elder-Led Church, 31.

8 Longenecker, Acts, 405.

9 Douglas J. Moo, The Epistle to the Romans, The New International Commentary on the New Testament, ed. Gordon Fee (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), 903.

10 Moo takes the word to mean that she was a deaconess, but adds that the structure of such offices was not well-developed at this time. Moo, The Epistle to the Romans, 917. Harrison demurs, noting that the word deaconess is not used here. Everett F. Harrison, Romans, The Expositors Bible Commentary, vol. 10, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1976), 161.

11 Thomas R. Schreiner, Romans, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament, ed. Moises Silva (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1998), 988.

12 Polhill, Acts, 342.

13 Longenecker, Acts, 458.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Chad Brand is Professor of Christian Theology at Boyce College in Louisville, Kentucky.

24

Answers from Tom Ascol, Tim Cantrell, Timothy Keller, Matt OReilly, Richard D. Phillips, and Carl Trueman

Pastors Forum: Are Denominations Worth It? 9Marks asked a roundtable of pastors the same question: Are denominations worth it? Here are their answers. Tom Ascol

Are denominations worth it? That depends on what your definition of it is. It is obviously valuable to cooperate for common causes that are germane to their mission. The New Testament points to the financial cooperation of churches in Macedonia, Achaia and Galatia (1 Cor. 16:1; 2 Cor. 8:1-7), the doctrinal cooperation between the churches in Jerusalem and Antioch (Acts 15:1-35), and the missionary cooperation referenced in 2 Corinthians 8:19. So cooperation among local churches is obviously biblical and can be beneficial in many practical ways.

However, such cooperation is not dependent on any particular denominational structure. That has never been truer than in our present day of instant and multi-faceted communication. The emergence of so many affinity networks among churches over the last ten years is a testimony to that.

A denomination of churches, such as the Southern Baptist Convention to which my church belongs, is not a church and thus lacks ecclesial authority. But it can still be worth it to the extent that it helpfully assist churches by providing avenues for cooperative ventures in a wide variety of ministry opportunities.

Tom Ascol is the senior pastor of Grace Baptist Church in Cape Coral, Florida.

Tim Cantrell

Our church just joined Sola5, an association of God-centered churches across Southern Africa. Just three days ago, we met as thirty pastors and leaders from many different churches to strategize for better church planting and training across the region. Further, we are planning to do a joint missions conference in near future. We also heard a report of what God is doing through sister churches up in Zambia and their joint efforts. These things are a great encouragement not only to us as pastors, but also to our people. None of us are in very large churches, so we are able to do far more for the gospel together than alone. We love rallying together around the great, fundamental truths of our faith, for which we stand firm.

Tim Cantrell is the pastor of Antioch Bible Church in Johannesburg, South Africa.

Tim Keller

Yes, denominations are worth it. First, as a Presbyterian, I believe that New Testament ecclesiology is connectional. I dont need to go into all the biblical reasons for that beliefthey are available in many places. But I think that, in general, local churches should be accountable to a broader body of elders than just those within their congregation. The broader body can bring perspective that often is impossible for leaders embroiled in a conflict or problem within a church.

25

However, I believe denominations do not provide all the fellowship and support a local church needs. In many ways denominations do the work of white corpuscles. White corpuscles attack infection, which means that denominations good work is largely negative, keeping ministers and churches accountable to sound doctrine and good order. The red corpuscle workof innovative ministry thinking and resourcingusually happens within networks of churches with not only the same doctrinal commitments but also similar visions for how to do ministry best in our time and place. Sometimes a network occurs within a denomination, but sometimes it can exist across denominations when the churches have similar doctrine (e.g., Reformed soteriology).

So most churches should have both a denomination as well as a good ministry network.

Tim Keller is the founding pastor of Redeemer Presbyterian Church in Manhattan.

Matt OReilly

I once thought that denominations undermined the unity of the church. In recent years, however, I have developed a more positive view. My thinking shifted as I began to appreciate how different denominations emphasize aspects of the Christian faith that others may sometimes neglect. Learning from those outside our own tradition will help us see beyond our denominational blinders.

I have benefited greatly by reading the work of those in other denominations. From Baptists, I learned evangelism; from Presbyterians, justification by faith; from Charismatics, sensitivity to the Holy Spirit; from Anglicans, catholicity and the beauty of liturgy. I hope that believers in these denominations benefit from the distinctives of my own Methodist tradition as well. John Wesley, convinced of God's power to deal with sin comprehensively, believed that God raised up the Methodists to emphatically proclaim and model Scriptural holiness. And at our best, we Methodists have faithfully interpreted and appropriated the biblical language of sanctification. I hope that believers in other traditions will benefit from this particularly Wesleyan emphasis as I have benefited from their emphases.

Christians are unified by the good news that Christ died for our sins and was raised for our justification. When this unity is authentic, it will be marked by charity. God is not glorified when Methodists and Baptists malign one another. If Christ has reconciled us all to God, then we must pursue peace among ourselves. We can begin doing this by learning from the distinctives of denominations other than our own.

Matt OReilly is pastor of First United Methodist Church in Union Springs, Alabama and adjunct professor of New Testament at Wesley Biblical Seminary and Asbury Theological Seminary.

Richard Phillips

Are denominations worth it?

Yes, with a big if. Denominations are important, valuable, and virtually inevitable in several important ways. First, denominations are necessary to ensure churches' confessional and ministerial integrity, so that Christ's sheep may be protected from false or incompetent shepherds. Effective oversight can only come from above, and doctrinal fidelity requires cultivation, training, and examination.

Second, denominations are valuable for the formal coordination of ministry and gospel mission. Long-term, permanent partnerships simply require the depth of agreement and formal coordination that denominations provide.

Third, denominations are important so that differences not essential to the gospel (paedo vs. craedo baptism, for instance) may be practiced in peace. In this respect, denominations are important to Christian unity, so that known

26

differences in polity or practice may be accommodated without ceaseless argument within and between churches. So denominations are important and valuable in providing oversight, coordinating long-term ministry and mission, and fostering unity.

But there is a big if.

Denominations are worth it if they do not think their boundaries encompass the entire kingdom of Christ. While being loyal to our own denominations, Christians and churches should regularly, joyfully, and zealously work together across denominational boundaries. Within a shared commitment to the gospel, our churches must be seen working together, and our vision for mission and ministry must be shaped not by our denominational affiliation but rather by the Great Commission of the reigning king Jesus Christ.

Rick Phillips is the senior minister at the Second Presbyterian Church in Greenville, South Carolina.

Carl Trueman

Denominations can be very good things. They can witness to the fact that somebody, somewhere actually believed in something at some point in time. They can also witness to the fact that important Christian doctrines are not limited to those things vital to salvation. Take baptism for example: one cannot have a church which takes the Bible seriously and which does not have a clear view on baptism or the Lords Supper. It is better to have churches that are committed either to believers baptism or to covenant baptism than to have churches that agree to differ on the issue as if it is of no importance.

Denominations can also act as safety valves. I appreciate the 9Marks guys very much, but if we were in the same church or denomination, we would have to fight over things like baptism. I am happy to have fellowship with the Capitol Hill Baptist crowd, and happy that we can do so without feeling the need to engage in mortal combat. Separate denominational affiliations facilitate that.

Finally, denominations offer the possibility of confessionally coherent connectionalism with an appropriate authority and accountability structure. I know my congregationalist friends disagree on the details of that, but I imagine they can sympathize with the basic point.

Carl Trueman is Paul Wolley Professor of Church History at Westminster Theological Seminary, and is the pastor of Cornerstone Presbyterian Church in Ambler, Pennsylvania.

27

By Toby Jenkins with Cade Campbell

When Disaster Strikes: How Other Churches Helped Ours Seeing an EF-4 tornado zero in on your town is terrifying. Living in the devastation it brings is horrifying. Responding with the gospel is liberating.

On March 2, 2012 this is exactly what I faced as a pastor of First Baptist Church of Henryville, Indiana. The town that I love was reduced to rubble, as were the homes of the people I love. It was beyond imagining. As I drove through our community, I was brought to tears by the destruction around me. I remember asking my wife Sonia, What are we going to do?

PASTORALLY UNPREPARED

I felt overwhelmed, unprepared, and insufficient for the work God had dropped in my lap. My fellow pastors and I knew we needed to reach out both to the needs of our church and to the community around us, and to speak the gospel through it all. But how? I was not prepared. For far too long my ministry vision was nearsighted. Whether your church is thriving or struggling, it is easy to become self-focused. Before the tornado hit, I had not valued church association, because I was more concerned about us and ours. But the easy way of selfishness is anti-gospel. The Bible calls us to a caring, cooperating, serving, and giving ministry that puts action to our affirmations.

PAULS CALL

In 2 Corinthians 8 and 9, Paul calls the church in Corinth to a ministry of cooperation and giving. He was working to send an offering of relief to the church in Jerusalem. They were suffering from a devastating famine. The book of Acts tells us the Jerusalem church had made great sacrifices to meet the needs in their midst, but then found themselves needing more help than they alone could provide. So Paul called the Corinthians to model Christ to the world by using their abundance to meet the needs of other congregations (8:13-15). In so doing, he teaches us that using the gifts that God has given to meet the needs of other churches is a reflection of Christs own love for us (8:9). We do this work knowing that God is the one who provides the resources for our ministry

28

(9:8-10). And we do this, ultimately, so that God would be glorified as his gracious character is made known: The ministry of this service is not only supplying the needs of the saints but is also overflowing in many thanksgivings to God (9:12; cf. vv. 11-15).

HELP CAME

Our church surely needed help after the tornado. The day after, I woke up not knowing whether help would come. The phone towers had been destroyed in the storm, and only a few calls had come through. But then the calls came, churches responded, and believers joined together to bring us gospel-fueled assistance:

First Baptist Church Fairdale showed up Saturday morning and started boarding up the churchs windows and putting tarps on the roof.

Bethel Baptist, which is three miles away, housed hundreds of volunteers that helped me love my people for months.

Local churches all across our country deployed volunteers and overwhelmed us with financial gifts. Victory Memorial Baptist Church sent a stack of Wal-Mart gift cards for us to give to our neighbors in the

community with personalized stickers that read, From FBC Henryville with love. Our state association of churches rushed to our aid with disaster relief. Our SBC State Executive Director Cecil

Seagle called to assure me: Dont worry. Love your people. Meet needs. Preach the gospel. Money and materials are on the way. So we did. The next day he shows up with a stack of $500 gift cards.

The stories are too many to tell. This last year, because of the generosity and love of sister churches, we have been able to love our community. We have been able to meet needs, bind up wounds, and most importantly preach the gospel to the people of Henryville. And God has worked mightily! Many individuals have believed. The wind of Gods Spirit has blown and is still blowing, a mighty gust stronger than any tornado.

CARE FOR SISTER CHURCHES

I want to encourage you to turn from a selfish inner-focus to an outward-looking mission focus. This demands a vision for leading churches to care for the needs of their sister churches. It took a tornado to teach me this ministry-altering lesson. We are co-laborers in the gospel. Many are hurting. Many are in need, and God has given us the resources to assist, to equip, and to evangelize. Let us center our cooperation on the cross and work together for the good of our churches and the glory of our Savior. As we join together in this way, we will be led to declare all the more: Thanks be to God for his inexpressible gift! (2 Cor. 9:15).

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Toby Jenkins is the senior pastor of First Baptist Church of Henryville, Indiana. Cade Campbell is the associate pastor for teaching and discipleship of FBC Henryville.

29

By Greg Gilbert

Why I Pray Publicly For Other Churches Every Sunday morning, I lead the congregation of Third Avenue Baptist Church in what we call a pastoral prayer. I pray for many things during that timecongregational events, members who are suffering, evangelistic opportunities, various officials in government, missions opportunities, and even events that have been in the nations headlines. The part of that prayer that elicits the most comment, howeverboth positive and out of sheer confusionis when I pray for another evangelical church or two that is meeting in the city of Louisville.

Each week, I choose one or two churches and pray for their services that day. I pray for the church to be attentive to the Word of God. I pray for the pastor to speak boldly and accurately from the Bible. I pray for people to be convicted of their sin, for Christians to be encouraged in the faith, and for non-Christians to be converted. I also thank the Lord that we live in a city where we are not the only church in which the gospel is preached!

Believe it or not, the practice of praying for other churches is so rare in many Christians experience that many dont know exactly how to process it. More than once during my pastorate, a visitor to Third Avenue has walked up to me with a very concerned look to express surprise that such-and-such church is having troubles. After all, why would the pastor of one church pray for another church if there werent serious problems afoot there?!

I think there are many benefits to doing this sort of thing week after week. For one thing, it helps me in the work of crucifying my own spirit of competition. Its so easy for pastors to subtly (if not less than subtly!) begin to think of other churches as the competition instead of as fellow proclaimers of the gospel in their city. I want to go on record, in the most public forum I have, as praying for the success and faithfulness of those churches. We are not in this to make a name for ourselves; we are all in it to make a name for our King.

Not only so, but I think those prayers do the same work of crucifying a spirit of competition in the members of Third Avenue. Pastors are not alone in struggling with feeling competitive with other churches. Members do too, and it is good for them to see their leaders working publicly to counteract that tendency so that it doesnt take root in the life of the church.

Praying for other churches also communicates an important truth about the various churches in a city: We are all on the same team! We all have the same mission, and it is to proclaim the gospel of Jesus and make disciples of him. The last thing we should want as pastors is to communicate a provincial, myopic spirit among our members that recognizes good only in our church, and cannot see what God is doing more broadly. We serve a massive God, and an important way to

30

show that to our people and teach them to rejoice in it is to teach them to care about Gods work in the lives of other churches.

I have found that praying for other churches also helps me to cultivate friendships with their pastors. It reminds me, week after week, that there are other men engaged in this same work that so consumes me each day, and challenges me to strain against any tendency I might have to isolate myself in the work.

In our church covenant at Third Avenue, one of the promises we make to one another as members is that we will not omit the great duty of prayer both for ourselves and for others. At its heart, that is a promise that we will remember not only Gods great delight in answering prayer and his unstoppable power to do so, but also the great truth that He is glorifying his Son through the work of churches all over our cities and the world.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Greg Gilbert is the senior pastor of Third Avenue Baptist Church and is most recently the author, with Sebastian Traeger, of The Gospel at Work: How Working for King Jesus Gives Purpose and Meaning to Our Jobs (Zondervan, forthcoming).

Think doctrine is lifeless and irrelevant?

Think again. Sound doctrine is the lifeblood of the churchs holiness, worship and witness.

Find out why in Bobby Jamiesons Sound Doctrine: How a Church Grows in the Love and Holiness of God

Go to 9marks.org/books

31

By Deepak Reju

Churches Cooperating In Pastoring A wee-little sheep breaks through a fence and runs away. But unlike most parables, his shepherd doesnt find him (Luke 15:1-7). This little sheep wanders to and fro, far away from home, and eventually stumbles upon another flock. From that moment on, another shepherd is given charge over his life. Imagine the first shepherd picking up his cell phone and saying to the new overseer, Hey, friend. There are a few things you should know about this wee-little sheep

I have no idea whether shepherds use cell phones while wandering across lush plains, but consider this point: shepherds should cooperate with other shepherds, churches with other churches, in order to wisely love the sheep entrusted to their care.

In our very mobile society, where people rarely stay put for long, you shouldnt be surprised when a Christian stumbles through your churchs front door carrying baggage full of junk from his past. In caring for the hurting sheep, a pastor can go it alone, with nothing but what the new member tells him, or he can informally cooperate with another pastor to better care for this sheep.

CHURCHES COOPERATING: EXAMPLES

Lets think about a couple of real-life examples.

A struggling member moves to another church. In many ways, this is the simplest and most straightforward example. A Christian who is struggling relocates to another city or state because of a job. He starts going to another church. The pastor knows there is a long history of problems, so he calls this sheeps previous pastor to get some background and advice.

Mediation between family members. Parents are not getting along with their adult children. The parents and the kids are members of different churches. Pastor Bob is getting one side of the story from the adult kids; Pastor Jim is getting the other side from the parents. Both pastors can persist in their one-sidedness, or they can take the simple step of picking up the phone and calling one another. The pastors act as mediators between family members, with eith