I completely agree with everything that’s been said, and I’m not adding anything new here either. I just wanted to repeat what Mark Dever said at T4G. He was speaking to a group of pastors, but I think his comment is applicable to all Christians in a local church. He asked, “When was the last time you inconvenienced yourself for another member?” I think he’s spot on. Our comforts can so often be an aid to our laziness and sin. They can wrongly make us think someone else is taking the intuitive.

This is why I love the biblical image of membership being a building (1 Cor. 3.9; 2 Cor. 6.16; Eph. 2:21; 1 Tim. 3:15; 2 Pet. 2.5). As bricks in this building we have to help support and rest on one another. You have to inconvenience yourself because the spiritual well-being of the brick above you depends on it.

Greg’s talk of inputs and outputs was starting to sound like some bad business text, but he saved it in the end. One quick comment about his discussion in the context of 3ABC is that it can be admittedly hard to turn the *output* switch on when you first come to a church. We have a fair amount of turnover in membership and new folks may find it difficult to walk in and start giving right off the block. Let me encourage you to do so anyway. You may be new, and it may not seem like there are any needy people here. Don’t be fooled. Start giving of yourself.

And with regard to Keith’s need for a sidekick, you need to write a personal ad. For example,

Athletic, intelligent MWM ISO, suitable companion for fun, laughs, etc. — be Tom to my Jerry, W. E. Coyote to my Roadrunner, etc.

OR you could just create a fictitious sidekick like they do on the Ref 21 blog. I’m thinking you might like a friend named Mr. I. M. Needy, Herr E. Tick, etc. It could be so much fun.

We want to be a place where elders can be grown and matured within our congregation. While we have many seminary students as members, they and we do not assume that all of them will be elders. We also don’t assume that all of our elders will be seminary guys. We seek to identify and to help mature elders by giving guys regular opportunities to preach and teach. We do that by pairing guys with current elders to teach Christianity Matters classes, by giving them opportunities to deliver Sunday evening devotions, and by giving a smaller number an opportunity to preach in a morning service. This gives a large group of guys ongoing opportunities to refine skills and to allow the church to speak into their lives regarding their teaching gifts. It’s routinely amazing and gratifying to me how blessed we are as a church to have so many gifted men. It’s also encouraging to know that we have the potential to be a blessing to other churches as our members leave and move on to other churches and places of service. Any present elders or members (send me an email) care to comment on this has helped them?

3ABC is different than most traditional SBC churches and from many contemporary evangelical churches in how we view the Lord’s Day. First of all, some of us like to call it the Lord’s Day. Beyond that though, we view this day as a day set apart for our spiritual edification and worship of the triune God. We begin the day with traditional teaching times (we avoid the term Sunday School) followed by a traditional corporate gathering of the church for worship. Our mornings are like most churches’ mornings.

Where 3ABC is distinct is that we actually come back to church in the evening to end the day in a similar way. It’s fast becoming a relic for a church to have any Sunday evening activity. I would not say that it is required for a church to be considered faithful, but it is beneficial. We find that it has been very helpful for the spiritual nurture of the church and for our worship to gather again on Sunday evenings. What do we do? We gather to sing, to pray for needs of the church and beyond, and to hear again from God’s Word. The evening text we meditate on is usually from the opposite testament than the one we studied in the morning - e.g. NT in the a.m. means we would hear from the O.T. at night — but both texts are always on a similar theological theme.

We prioritize this evening service in our corporate life over other options like one-on-one discipleship, home groups, etc., because we believe that the corporate identity of the church needs to be prioritized and nurtured. As you can see, we value those things (home groups, etc.) too, but the purpose of the corporate life of the church isn’t first to make those other things possible. Those other benefits grow from a healthy and vibrant corporate church life. You’re not part of a family so you can have one close brother or sister — the gift of family life, biological or spiritual, is so much more than that one close relationship.

I posted last night about how we encourage non-elders to attend portions of our elders’ meetings. This morning in my email I received the following, which I am posting since we don’t enable comments:

Bruce,

I just read the 3rd blog where you wrote about elders’ meetings.  I just wanted to agree with everything you said.  It is very encouraging to see the elders work through tough issues and see how y’all love the church.  Plus, the food is awesome.  Thank you for your generosity.

I’ve had some conversations with folks lately about 3ABC for the purpose of helping them understand where 3ABC would fit in the range of Gospel preaching churches here in Louisville. At times I tend to think of us as being very similar to other like-minded churches. The differences certainly are very narrow when compared to other denominations, etc. But, we are still distinct in many aspects of our corporate life and in how we shepherd our members.

One of our goals as a church is to mentor and train elders. We are small and don’t have a lot of formal mechanisms for this yet. One thing that we do is to invite non-elders to our elders’ meetings. Our elders’ meetings can be rather lengthy, and at times even downright exciting. Keith may start pontificating about the Trinity for example, or he may throw my kids toys around. (There is also usually lots of coffee and dessert prepared by my wife.) A few months ago we decided that inviting non-elders to selected portions of our meetings would be a simple way to mentor young men and to help train those who may be preparing for full-time ministry. We thought at first that it would only be Seminary students who were interested in coming. The reality is that we have had many U of L students come also. The conclusion for all those non-elders who’ve come is that this has been one of the most insightful and helpful things for them in understanding how elders practically lead and shepherd the church. It’s small, and it’s simple, but it helps us fulfill what we see as our responsibility to help train future leaders of the church.

No, I’m not affirming the primacy of the Roman Catholic Church (RCC), but the Vatican did so this week. And in so doing it also stated that other churches of Protestant affiliation are defective or not true churches. (Here’s the FoxNews report and you can find the official document published by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith from the Vatican here.)

What was affirmed in the document? In short, through a series of five Q&As the document, which was ratified by the pope, reaffirmed what the Vatican II Council had previously stated regarding the doctrine of the church - The true “Church of Christ subsists in the Catholic Church.” (”Subsists” is the key word.) Here’s the Congregation quoting the Vatican II Council:

Christ “established here on earth” only one Church and instituted it as a “visible and spiritual community”, that from its beginning and throughout the centuries has always existed and will always exist, and in which alone are found all the elements that Christ himself instituted. “This one Church of Christ, which we confess in the Creed as one, holy, catholic and apostolic […]. This Church, constituted and organised in this world as a society, subsists in the Catholic Church, governed by the successor of Peter and the Bishops in communion with him.”

Regarding other churches and ecclesiastical communities, the Congregation didn’t say they were of no value. They actually are “instruments of salvation.”

“It follows that these separated churches and Communities, though we believe they suffer from defects, are deprived neither of significance nor importance in the mystery of salvation. In fact the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as instruments of salvation, whose value derives from that fullness of grace and of truth which has been entrusted to the Catholic Church” (my emphasis added).

There’s much that could be said about this reaffirmation. But as an evangelical Christian I have to say that I appreciate it. I think this is a positive move, not because I believe in the primacy of the RCC or papal authority. Nor do I agree with Rome that Protestant churches aren’t “churches in the proper sense” because they “don’t enjoy apostolic succession in the sacramental Orders, and are, therefore, deprived of a constitutive element of the Church.” This is another one of the Reformational distinctions: a true church is constituted by a body of believers where there is the right preaching of the word of God and the right administration of the sacraments. Thus, there’s not much I agree with in this document.

My appreciation, however, derives from the fact that this reaffirmation highlights Protestant and Catholic distinctions that I think have been lost in the fog of ecumenical movements. Only this time they are being made from a Catholic vantage point, a view we’re not used to seeing. (You can find these essential distinctions from a Protestant standpoint over at Reformation21 in Carl Trueman’s latest article.)

Part of the Vatican’s motivation for the document was to remove some of the ecumenical fog. Therefore, it’s not surprising that most criticism has come from proponents of ecumenical outreach; criticisms such as “We pray for the day that the Roman Catholic Church moves beyond exclusivist claims so that we can further the cause of Christian unity for which our Lord Jesus Christ prayed – so that the world may believe (John 17: 21)” (The World Alliance of Reformed Churches). It’s those types of statement that give me appreciation for the RCC’s reaffirmaion.

(You guys may disagree, and John 17 is to be dealt with. What do ya think? Keith, be nice. Oh yeah, I know I have two big conversations going at once.)