Yesterday the church I serve as Pastor decided to change the doctrinal statement. Let me say that again. Yesterday the church I serve as Pastor decided to change the doctrinal statement. No one got killed. There were no scratches or bruises. No blood was shed. Churches don’t change doctrinal statements. But Coastal did.
The congregation voted to substitute the Apostles’ and Nicene Creeds for its general, run of the mill, evangelical doctrinal statement, a statement that is more exclusionary than inclusionary, like all the evangelical churches to which I have belonged. Actually we have done what John Piper wished to do at Bethlehem Baptist and so far has not realized. We adopted a “gateway” doctrinal statement that allows Christ-followers to join with us in serving Christ who might have disagreements with us on secondary issues – baptism, male-specific eldership, best form of church government, or even different views on the inspiration and inerrancy of the Bible. As Piper writes, the local church should reflect as much as possible the universal church. The way most evangelical church doctrinal statements are written, you can only join (even as a brand new Christian) if you consent to its interpretation of these secondary doctrines. This leads to lots of people signing a doctrinal statement they really have no commitment to.
In addition to the gateway doctrinal statement, we also have an Affirmation of Faith that all elders must sign and seek to teach in its fullness. In other words, elders must “step it up” when it comes to doctrinal maturity. It is essentially a Baptist version of the Westminster Confession of Faith, once again, a statement crafted by John Piper and contemporized to respond to our cultural and theological context. This is particularly important because Coastal will be facing a pastoral transition in the next several years (I am 60 this year) and they need a doctrinal statement that is fuller than the usual Ten or so points found in most church constitutions. This Affirmation of Faith will be a guiding document for choosing the next senior pastor.
I am proud of Coastal and feel even more comfortable as its pastor. There is a certain theological integrity and sophistication in this new arrangement that allows me to not cringe at certain points. It also allows an even greater identification with the ancient church before the church became Roman Catholic and Protestant.
The congregation also voted to observe the Lord’s Supper each Lord’s Day. In my practice I am not aware of any other evangelical church that does this except for the Christian Church movement. This is a wonderful gift to our church.Not only has the evangelical church observed the Supper on a minimal basis (dont’ want to flirt with ritualism, you know – though we would baptize every Sunday if there were enough converts), now a growing number of evangelical churches are shuttling off the Lord’s Supper to a different night of the week, a move guaranteed to even futher marginalize the Supper and demonstrate how little it really means for sustaining a life of discipleship.
The question was asked in the meeting that had to be asked; doesn’t this mean less time for preaching? I like that question. It is sensitive to what Protestants really bring to the table. My answer is that it doesn’t mean less time for the sermon. It might be less time for the musical concerts churches put on on Sundays, however. I think that is not a big loss. In fact, I think it is a necessary loss.
Anyway, both these moves, the change in doctrinal statment and the centering of the Lord’s Supper, are both part of Coastal Church’s desire to connect with its roots in the ancient church, to add a bit more centripetal force to the centrifugal force of Protestantism.
