CHURCH MEMBERSHIP
The New Testament teaches that Christians in a given locality assemble themselves into a congregation. We call that church membership. When preaching on church membership I am typically greeted with two reactions. First, some brethren who have been visiting our services for a while are impressed with the need to “place membership.” They do so. Second, some brethren who have been attending for some time view themselves as “members at large.” They see no need to place membership. They remain unchanged in that conviction. Not only do some remain fixed in that opinion they are sometimes combative about it.
Are they looking for an explicit statement that says, “Thou shalt place membership with a local congregation”? Short of such a directive they see no need to be so obligated. They maintain their freedom to be driftwood. They call themselves Christians “at large.” That means they are not obligated to the church they attend outside of occasional sightings, opinionated directives, and very little (if any) contribution.
Why does the scriptural underpinning of church membership carry no weight with some people? The arguments from the New Testament are clear. They cannot be logically or scripturally assailed. Church membership is scriptural for several reasons:
For Reasons of Church Organization
The church of Christ, in its universal sense, is the general spiritual body over which Jesus Christ is the head and every Christian is a member (Matt. 16:18; Col. 1:18, 24; Eph. 1:22). The Lord adds the saved to the church (Acts 2:47).
The church at Philippi consisted of: “Saints,” who are members of that assembly. These were not floating church members! “Bishops,” that is, leaders who are overseers of that church (1 Tim. 3:1-7). And “deacons,” who are qualified servants in that congregation (1 Tim. 3:8-10). Were these “saints” just a loose community of Christians “at large” who had no obligation to the bishops of the church there? Did the elders at Philippi oversee a group of souls who had no ties to them at all? Did the deacons serve a gathering of Christians who did not believe in church membership? Surely we can see the point!
For Reasons of Involvement
If one feels justified to never identify with a congregation how can he or she contribute to the work of that church? Where is the obligation to be involved in the work of that congregation? There is no accountability to the elders. There is no loyalty to a home congregation. There can be no joint participation if one is just “a member at large”!
Phoebe was involved with the church in Cenchreae as one of its members (Rom. 16:1). Cenchreae was a small seaport town eight miles from Corinth. Cenchreae had a congregation. Phoebe was “of” that church. That is, she was a member of it. She was not a sister at large! She went to help the church at Rome, but was a member of the church at Cenchreae.
For Reasons of Oversight
Churches of Christ who have qualified men should have a plurality of elders overseeing the work of that congregation (Acts 14:23; Tit. 1:5). These bishops are to shepherd the local flock. They do not have jurisdiction over any other congregation (Acts 20:28).
Picture if you will, Mr. Jones moves from one city to another. He was serving under the oversight of the elders of congregation A where he lived formerly. The elders of his former congregation watched for his soul (Heb. 13:17). Mr. Jones finds a good congregation in the city where he now lives (congregation B). He needs to make known his desire to work and worship with them. This is what we mean by the expression “place membership.” Somebody might object to that expression. Okay, call it what you will, but it needs to be done!
Brother Jones is a member of the body of Christ wherever he may go. Yet, he cannot function under the oversight of two congregations at once, or of all congregations (as the “Christian at large” misnomer would suggest). It is disturbing how some fail to understand this elementary principle.
Brethren need to identify themselves with a congregation and work specifically under the oversight of those elders. How can elders watch for the souls of persons without knowing those who are committed to their care? Also, how can elders exercise the divinely given function of oversight unless persons submit to that oversight? Those brethren who rail against the idea of placing membership in a local congregation actually oppose the Lord’s design!
For Functions in the Body
When one believes in Jesus and is baptized, he is admitted into the one body (1 Cor. 12:13). When one is in Christ’s body he is a member of the church to which God adds him (Acts 2:47).
Is placing membership in a church necessary? Is it Scriptural? Yes on both counts! The New Testament teaches that we are to be in a congregation, subject to the leadership of the elders, involved in that work and supportive of the Lord’s cause in that place. As such, he is a functioning part of that body (1 Cor. 12:14-20). That is, he is the eye, the hand, the feet of Christ. He is but one member of the body. There are many others (Rom. 12:5). God blends a congregation together with less honorable and more presentable members (1 Cor. 12:22-24). They work together so there is no schism in the body (vs. 25).
Jesus does not have driftwood members of his body who are wandering around unattached! Of what value would a “hand” of Christ be to his body if it claimed independence from the body itself? Paul would be dumbfounded by the popular argument that one is a church member at large! He would be troubled by those who claim to love Jesus, but insist that they have no use for church organization! As Paul shows in Romans 12 every congregation needs members who come together with their unique set of gifts to help the church grow!