What is the reality that our term “Church Membership” is trying to describe?
A state in which:
A person professes to be born again, and the credibility that profession has been examined and affirmed by the elders and congregation.
Christ’s authorization to bind and loose – to mark out those who are his, and who are not.
The person’s profession of faith has been given expression through believer’s baptism, which is the New Testament ordinance for visible entry into Christ’s body, the church.
The person has made explicit that:
this local church is the one in which the “one-anothers” of scripture will be pursued and lived out.
The intention is to live in obedience to the commands of Christ, which includes the obligations to be present, and to love and serve others in the local church.
That it is to the elders and congregation of this specific local church to which they will live in accountability.
Sufficient alignment exists with the doctrines and positions outlined in the church’s doctrinal statement and accompanying documents, and the practical expression of those commitments, such that the person expects to be able to live in joyful harmony with elders and other church members.
It is understood that there are some doctrines that must be held to, without which a credible testimony of being born again does not exist.
The elders and congregation recognize the intention of the person to live out their faith in this specific congregation, and embrace in turn a specific obligation of care, and in the case of the elders, responsibility for oversight, as those who must give an account.
Note: Bobby Jamieson, in his book “Going Public”, makes a case for the idea that what is described above does not constitute church membership. He argues that in the purest sense, church membership is defined, and indeed constituted by legitimate administration of and participation in the ordinances of baptism and the Lord’s supper. He argues that to be baptized by a local church, and then to participate in the Lord’s supper in that local church is to become a member of that local church.
Jamieson’s case has merit. But even if what he says is sound, the question of a believer’s relationship to a church in which he participates subsequent to moving or transferring from the local church in which he was baptized bears examination. Perhaps my thoughts above are helpful in this regard.