Like a fire

Church Membership

I was recently talking to a friend about church membership and the woes of consumerism in the church. It seems tht almost everyone I talk to about chucrh membership is saying the same thing. We don’t have as many members as we once did or should have. Our members don’t understand the importance of their roles at church. They don’t understand their commitment to the body of Christ.

In the Great Giveaway, David Fitch relates this to the individualism of the American evangeliscal church.

Our focus on numbers, bigness, and large institutions is therefore rooted in two of America’s sacred cows: the autonomy of the individual and the necessity to organize for economic efficiency.

While, I am still trying to decide if I agree with Fitch, I am seeing some problems with church membership. My generation in particular seems to feel like church membership is a contrived way to get people to commit to something in a backwards way. If we aren’t members in the formal process, then does that undo what service we do in the church? If we actually do go through the formal process, are we still members if we only occasionally come and rarely serve o church that we belong to? Even bigger is the fencing of the communion table. Can I not take communion if I am not a formal member of the church or a church, even if I am serving the church more than most members of the formal membership? This is a big question for many people I talk to. They want to know their place in the body. The want their place to be more than a formal way of acknowledgement. They want to actually belong and be a part of the church, yet formal membership seems to take away from that. It seems much like what has happened to education since it became free and public (aside).

My friend had a great idea that I wish I could take credit for. He actually credited someone else, but I think it is one of the freshest ideas of the church today.

Pastor A: “So, how many members do you have in your church?”

Pastor B: “None.”

Pastor A: “What? How can you not have ANY members?”

Pastor B: “We don’t have members. We only have staff. If a person acknowledges what we are doing, affirms it and wants to be a part of doing something about it, then they are staff.”

Pastor A: “?!??!??”

I don’t know if it is that simple or is maybe just looking at it a different way makes that big of a difference. What I do see out of this is that membership should be more than a formal process to warming a pew. Membership has its privledges? Yup! It also has its responsibilities just like any other relationship.

Why is it that we don’t talk about those responsibilities when people become members? Or, if we do, that we don’t actually hold people accountable for them?

1  1

10 Comments

1. 

   Dude, I was talking with someone last week about this very thing. Ever since I was little I never understood the whole membership thing. When I ask about it, the only response I've ever received is, "People who are members are allowed to vote and it helps keep people committed." Hmmm... Those both seem like pretty lame reasons to me. First, what if I don't really care if I can place my annual vote on the church budget? Second, if membership is the best thing you have going in your church to maintain commitment, then I suggest you have far greater issues to address. I dunno. Maybe I'm a heritic, but church membership seems kinda silly to me (and it's not necessarily biblical either).

   Tim / 13 Oct 2006 / 10:04 PM

2. 

   Wow, great summary of what I always get in arguments/debates over. Really, if I'm already doing all kinds of things for the church, what does it matter whether you call me a "member" or not? If churches allow/expect non-members to have responsibilities for things within the church, is the only difference between members and non-members that the members get the benefits with the responsibilities and the non-members only get the responsibilities? So, let me get this right. Jack is a member, but he does nothing for the church nor does he support it with his tithes (those go to missionaries he supports). Alan, on the other hand, is not a member, but does tithe some and works every other weekend in Sunday school. Which is a more valuable addition to the church body? Let's move on to communion. Correct me if I'm wrong, but communion is about the personal relationship between God and you. What does church "membership" have to do with it? Show me where this "fencing the table" idea comes from in the Bible. One reference will do. More thoughts later...

   hash / 14 Oct 2006 / 12:47 AM

3. 

   As a 26 year pastor, I think you are hitting some key concerns about the spiritual issues of memebership. Is it an American organizational system? if so, dump it, unless you want to keep property and maintain a non-profit status and get loans from banks. The spiritual side is dicey. Jesus says where 2 or 3 are gathered, there I am in the midst. So membership is not required for Jesus' presence, but it does affirm the reality of my commitment to this one, unique, warty community of believers in a similar way my marriage vow commits me to one person. I think membership validates incarnation (a real, in-time, in-place community) versus the idealistic mystic community. I really think it's far more about ministry to others than it is about benefit to belonging (like a health club).

   Don / 14 Oct 2006 / 12:59 AM

4. 

   Off-topic, but thought I'd tell you I like your new author description. The old one really bothered me. Peace.

   Milton Stanley / 14 Oct 2006 / 7:54 AM

5. 

   Tim, I think that this is one of our generations challnges to answer. I am glad to know there are others thinking about it. Hash, I thought you would resonate with this. I'll post one on communion later. Don, thanks for cemmenting and the affirmation. Milton, Off-topic is welcome here and I am no longer burned out, thanks to God and my friends.

   Paul / 14 Oct 2006 / 9:44 AM

6. 

   As to the last sentence, I don't think it's a matter of holding people accountable. It's a matter of them loving the body of Christ so much that they'll sacrifice willingly. If someone doesn't want to give or serve, then they shouldn't. It would be ridiculous for them to do so grudgingly. God doesn't need it. Maybe I'm reading your last sentence wrong. The thing about it is that when I became a member it was a mechanical process, just like getting married was. But in both cases, when the process was finished, there was a feeling of "rightness" - of belonging. 1+1=1

   PaulF / 14 Oct 2006 / 10:54 AM

7. 

   PaulF As always, great thoughts. It is always better when people love each other well. However, in marriage, there is always a deep sense of what is expected and a call to commitment. Many pastors won't even marry a couple if they don't have premarital counseling to prepare them for the commitment of marriage. If in marriage those commitments aren't met, then there are ways to reconcile the relationship and steps to take to continue the relationship. I would like to see the same seriousness applied to the sense of belonging and commitment to the bride of Christ.

   Paul / 14 Oct 2006 / 6:31 PM

8. 

   I can live with that.

   PaulF / 14 Oct 2006 / 9:56 PM

9. 

   A guy named Shane made a good comment on my blog that I think summarizes the problem well: "If we can find a way to make it a commitment to each other instead of a commitment to the institution I think you will find church memebership will become more than just a church letter." (P.S. Dunno why the trackback to this entry didn't work, Paul. Sorry about that. *shrugs*)

   Tim / 15 Oct 2006 / 1:08 AM

10. Credit Card Debt Consolidation Counseling: Be Your Own Boss... With the increasing number of companies in the market that offer various Credit card debt consolidation counseling services, now it does not really matter much if you have a poor or bad credit score. It is very easy to apply for these services, as you ...

    Christian Free Credit Counseling / 09 Feb 2008 / 7:09 PM