!

Matt Marino

Theology of Ministry 1

Professor Glodo

Philosophy of Ministry

INTRODUCTION

The following pages represent my philosophy of ministry in the context of Providence

Reformed Church in Meridian, Idaho. The purpose here is not yet to cast a vision or mission

statement to be owned by other co-laborers at PRC. Rather it is to express how I will personally

serve and lead so as to fulfill what such vision or mission statements will be. Having said that,

what follows cannot help but be an exercise in “theological vision” [Keller 17-21], given the

nature of my own gifts and calling.

My method is what I understand to be the classical reformed way. This will give a

definite privilege to the Word of God as the norm without norm, the principle by which we are

semper reformanda. In other words, the mantra is not “always reforming” in the sense of

progressivism, but rather it is Ecclesia semper reformanda est—the Reformed church is always

being reformed. The Word is the change agent and we are conforming to it. Consequently the

ministry of the Word must be preeminent as the informing, transforming, and correcting force in

the whole church. That will be important in relation to my own service, as my calling is to handle

the Word in ways that are distinct from the members at large: whether in preaching the gospel,

administering sacraments, or exercising discipline.

 !2

As an abstract for this statement, we will proceed in the following order: First to that

“theological vision” in two parts: (i.) listing foundational commitments; and (ii.) explaining: a.

the primary functions of the church and b. how ministry particulars play into each of those.

Following these I will turn more internally to (iii.) a summary and self-reflection on: a. gifts; b.

readiness; c. particular sense of call; d. strengths and weaknesses; and finally to a (iv.) pastor /

mentor assessment with my brief responses. Because of how our confessional standards relate to

our particular vision and our unity with the body of Christ in our community, we will address this

in the corresponding section. Finally I will ask the reader’s patience and attention to what I will

refer to as a “transitional calling,” that involves the planting, foundational structuring, and

leadership training at PRC, while I obtain advanced degrees for my more long-term calling.

I. FOUNDATIONAL COMMITMENTS

What we believe about God and the gospel makes our ministry what it is. In my

perspective the same order that makes good systematic theology makes good ministry. Everyone

who serves in any leadership capacity will be expected to believe these things. Those who serve

as elders must be able to defend these truths as well as to articulate why each of these make

sound ministry practices what they are.

The Scriptures. The Bible is the Word of God. The apostles and prophets were inspired by

the Holy Spirit and thus the original writings were without error of any kind. The 66 books of the

canon we have are God’s own word, absolutely sufficient and authoritative for all of our faith

and practice. How does this view of Scripture shape my ministry? For one thing, it completely
 !3

shapes my view of preaching. Both the content and the form of preaching ought to be determined

by such a clear word from God.

The Triune God. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are one divine essence revealed

in three distinct persons, existing from all eternity in a self-sufficient communion of perfect love

and holiness. All that is in God is therefore indivisible (simple) and unchangeable (immutable).

That means that there is no attribute of God that is not wholly characterized by all of his other

attributes. It also means that no action of God, nor relation of God to that which is not-God,

could ever be done in a way, or constrain him in a way, that contradicts the divine essence. All

that we mean by God’s essential character is the fountainhead of all blessedness that ever was or

will be, so that we define reality from God to the things he has made, and not the other way

around. How does this view of God shape my ministry? It is in that God-to-world logic. If we

do not define things in God by things in the creation—if we do not “pull him down” to answer to

us in that way—then the same applies to things in ministry. God cannot be refashioned to suit our

audience or our expectations for “success” in ministry.

Creation, Fall, Promise. God created all things to bring glory to himself. He called his

whole creation “good” at the beginning: preeminently man and woman as his image bearers.

Adam disobeyed God and consequently all of his race after him was born into sin and death. But

God did not wait for the sinner to come back to him. In the Garden he was already taking the

initiative, telling of a Seed of the Woman who would one day crush the serpent. As the human

race plunged itself further in rebellion, God was starting over with a new humanity, making a

covenant of grace in which sins would be forgiven, death would be destroyed and eternal life

would be even greater than the first creation. The promise of redemption also proves that God’s
 !4

plan for creation will not be frustrated. How does this view of creation, fall, and promise

shape my ministry? It prevents us from turning our back on the world, since God himself did

not do that. It also balances how we begin our gospel presentation. We do not merely start with

the bad news and the law. This “way of the master” is commendable at least in making the law

lead to the conviction necessary to feel the need for the cross. But even the law needs

intelligibility in the larger framework of God’s design for the world and our own place as image-

bearers in it. It seems to me that this will even intensify the law and our guilt, as we see from

what a lofty height we have fallen.

Redemption Accomplished: or the Work of Christ. God sent his Son, Jesus Christ, to take

on flesh, to live the perfect life of obedience to God’s law, to pay the penalty for sin in the place

of his people, and to rise from the grave and ascend to heaven, where he now reigns and rules,

and where he now prays for the saints. How does this view of Christ’s Person and Work shape

my ministry? The gospel affects the mission of the church by preventing the mission from

becoming the gospel. As Machen said about the difference between Christianity and liberalism—

i. e. that ours is a good news in the indicative and our Christ is a Savior, while their gospel is in

the imperative and their Christ is an Example1—so we need to understand that we cannot simply

invite people to come along with us on God’s mission, without first declaring the terms of peace

between a holy God and a rebel sinner.

Redemption Applied: or the Work of the Spirit. Sinners are saved by grace alone, through

faith alone, in the performance of Christ alone. Only the gifts of the Holy Spirit can cause sinners

to be born again so that we repent and exercise saving faith. When anyone repents of all their sin

1 cf. J. Gresham Machen. Christianity and Liberalism. 47, 81, 96

 !5

and places their trust in the Son’s finished work, God imputes his righteousness over to our

account (Gal. 2:16, 2 Cor. 5:21). Now the Spirit does not just initiate the faith which justifies, but

he also cries out within us the assurance that we are sons and daughters of the Father (Rom.

8:15-16, Gal. 4:6), and he also works sanctification in us, so that our faith is not dead but zealous

for good works (Jam. 2:17, 22, Titus 2:14). How does this view of our salvation shape my

ministry? Since the Holy Spirit lives to glorify the Son in his work (Jn. 16:14) and since the

contours of that work are meant for our assurance, I cannot sympathize with the popular demand

to find our humility by watering down the doctrines of grace. There is a case to be made for

watching our use of divisive buzzwords or heady seminary concepts. All of that is one thing. But

it is another thing to gloss over the practical power in the truths of our salvation. Instead of

divorcing assuring-certainty and uniting-humility, perhaps we should just work harder at

communicating with more precision and less anxiety to convert everyone into an instant finished

project.

One Church: Holy, Catholic & Apostolic. This is one church across the world and

throughout history. This church is the bride and body of Christ. It exists to glorify God through

the uncompromising preaching of the gospel and lives of holiness and love that display his

coming kingdom in this age. The church is essential to our spiritual existence. How does this

view of the church shape my ministry? We were not made to be lone ranger Christians. This is

especially important to assert in our day where radical individualism reigns and where churches

are pressured to become marketing agencies competing for customers.

The Second Coming, Final Judgment, Eternal State. Jesus Christ is coming again, this

time in glory with all his angels to judge his enemies. On the Last Day, at the blast of a trumpet,
 !6

both the righteous and wicked will rise: the righteous to eternal life and the wicked to everlasting

damnation (Jn. 5:28-29, 1 Cor. 15:52). Christ will separate the sheep from the goats (Mat.

25:32-33). Paradise lost will be paradise restored, except unimaginably greater, as both body and

soul, heaven and earth are perfectly united as the Lord promised to make “all things new” (Rev.

21:5). The descriptions of the return of Christ in the NT seem to focus on how we ought to live in

light of the Master’s sudden appearance (Mat. 25:13, 2 Pet. 3:11-12); and not in speculating

about the times or seasons (Mat. 24:36, Acts 1:7). How does this view of last things shape my

ministry? It fills us with a good urgency. Our business is to pray to the Lord of the harvest to

raise up more laborers (Mat. 9:38) and to fill up the King’s banquet hall (Mat. 22:9-10), and to

mean in our hearts the line of that song that Watts penned: “We long to see thy churches full…”

II. PRIMARY FUNCTIONS & MINISTRY PARTICULARS

What is the church’s mission or purpose? Often there are five essentials listed: 1.

worship, 2. discipleship, 3. community, 4. evangelism, and 5. works of mercy. I realize that the

words “formation” and “mission” and even “justice” have been used in recent years as either

synonyms for the words I will use, or else overlapping categories. Nevertheless I am comfortable

enough with the standard twentieth century Evangelical “five star” language. Note that

everything the church is designed to do, in one way or another, falls under these five heads, even

if some activities are intersections of more than one of these five. But what are these five

essential functions and how should they be done?

1. Worship. Contrary to the reduction of worship in Evangelicalism to our subjective

response to the music set, corporate worship encompasses the whole service and flows from the
 !7

Word and the sacraments, to prayer and singing praises. Pastors are “the worship guys.” Even if

we are not musically inclined, we at least have to ensure that those who are understand what

congregational singing is and that we are not assembled in order to be entertained. My own role

is to lead a group unfamiliar with Reformed worship out of the categories and expectations of the

Charismatic and Seeker paradigms. I have already written three articles that were made required

reading for the core group.

Central to public worship is the preached Word. The aforementioned connection between

Scripture and preaching does not mean a wooden concept of expositional preaching, where one

must simply run the ringer from left to right in Bible books for the entire course of ministry.

Matching topics to the congregation’s stage of development, massive problems that arise in the

body, and raging cultural controversies, is all very pastoral. What makes it properly expositional

is that the structure of the message is derived from the mind of God in the flow of biblical

passage. But the choice of which passage may (must) often be topical without having

compromised.

It is also fashionable today to pit the “all of life as worship” paradigm against the Lord’s

Day gathering. My leadership would be vocal against this. I would borrow from the reasoning of

Thomas Watson who said, “If we love God we prize his ordinances, because there we meet with

God. He speaks to us in His Word, and we speak to Him in prayer. By this let us examine our

love to God. Do we desire intimacy of communion with God? Lovers cannot be long away from

each other.”2

2 Watson. All Things for Good. 75

 !8

2. Discipleship. The act of “shepherding” or “pastoring,” considered as a verb, has one

foot in discipleship and always another in the other four areas. Discipleship requires a diversity

of gifts in light of there being different kinds of sheep: many psychological makeups in various

seasons of life [cf. Bucer 70-73]. Through all of that, however, what is the shepherd called to do

in general but feed the sheep (cf. Jn. 21:17)? Preaching, teaching, one-on-one mentoring, and

leading by example, are all ways that this is done. Now there are teaching elders and ruling

elders. The pastor does not just declare, but he also disciplines. At every point on the spectrum of

administrative and judicial discipline, there is the art of counseling. This is not my gift or calling.

Yet even conflict resolution, counseling, and corrective discipline are ministries of the Word. So

even those undershepherds more gifted at these than myself are those I have an interest in

training in sound doctrine (Titus 2:1ff).

Leadership training is an extension of discipleship. It is not only a kind of discipleship,

but it is also a degree in the maturity of some disciples whom God has called to serve. Shepherds

and teachers are designed, in part, “to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up

s the body of Christ” (Eph. 4:11-12). And Paul tells Timothy, “what you have heard from me in

the presence of many witnesses entrust to faithful men, who will be able to teach others also” (2

Tim. 2:2). As Section III will make clear, I believe that my time planting churches is numbered.

In fact I believe this third one is my last, and not because I will remain as the permanent pastor.

We are raising up other elders, and in God’s providence, there is even now relationship being

built with someone who appears to be ideal as the long-term pastor. This is my desire. And if this

is God’s will then my role will morph into my more natural gift set of teaching and training. This

is genuine discipleship.
 !9

3. Community. C. S. Lewis once described friendship love as two people on a common

path, side-by-side, viewing the world from the same perspective.3 I have always agreed with him

about this and have thought that so much of the “relationship” attempts in church are really an

attempt to cheat this process. In saying this I am not denying that there must also be effort and

real skills that build fellowship. What I am saying is that it cannot be shallow. Everything from

ideal spaces for events and willing servants to those good with calendars and calling on people—

this is all the stuff of community-building. What is my role in that? Encourage it. Announce it.

Keep an eye out for togetherness-defeaters, whether cliques or over-exhaustion or one-

dimensional activities.

Talk of ministry particulars would be an exercise in empty hypotheticals if we did not put

this concretely within the context of Meridian, Idaho. The Treasure Valley, as we call it, is a

unique hybrid of the original Western rugged individualism, a Wesleyan-Mormon religious

settlement, a mass influx of Left Coasters, all together with a conservative push to reinstitute the

primacy of the home in all things spiritual and cultural. What follows is a discernible form of

church expected. The pendulum swing between Keller’s duo of “religion” and “irreligion” [31] is

not wholly different here than anywhere else in the U. S. What is somewhat unique is that on the

legalistic side, there is an anti-church exaltation of the head of the home’s performance. The

conservative impulse congratulates ourselves for “reclaiming” some biblical form (e. g.

headship). In reality the dichotomy between church and home becomes a spiritual veneer to

cover up the same individualism that avoids church in other settings. Anything that doesn’t

measure up to the “ideal” is disqualified from church: not simply individuals from office, but

3 cf. C. S. Lewis. The Four Loves. 66

 !10

ministry activities that “should be happening at home.” The watchman part of my ministry needs

to make sure such an impulse does not get into leadership, lest ministry to children, youth,

women, and those training for ministry are once again banished and its would-be participants

relegated to the suburban penalty box.

One example of how my theological vision meets the ministry particulars in our context:

divine hospitality as part of what I have called “the Romans 14 way.” There is a lot going on in

such passages about Christian liberty, charity, and maturity. But the practical drum that I would

beat to the congregation is Paul’s conclusion: “Therefore welcome one another as Christ has

welcomed you, for the glory of God” (Rom. 15:7). There is a “gospel-therefore” that would be

the lifeblood on our ministry. It challenges our people that if you want to look more like God in

the gospel, then welcoming people and letting God sort out their secondary convictions in his

own time is the key.

4. Evangelism. Right away it may be objected that “evangelism” refers to outreach in

one’s own neck of the woods, whereas “mission” is a broader outreach. But missional theology

has encompassed the church’s whole being with the missio Dei, and so I think privileging one

word over others sometimes proves too much. What matters is that our creed not live up to the

caricature. I mean the notion that Calvinists have no reason to evangelize. Our group has done

outreach before: street witnessing, events at BSU, park services. We have done it before and

done it well. Then came parenthood. We have to find new ways to reach out from more

stationary resources, as well as to employ new laborers in the harvest. In this season it is in the

sphere of training that I would “do the work of an evangelist” (2 Tim. 4:5).
 !11

5. Works of Mercy. Caring for people’s various needs works in concentric circles. Paul

said, “let us do good to everyone, and especially to those who are of the household of faith” (Gal.

6:10). This also does not call for reinventing the wheel. There are plenty of ministries that we can

partner with that do elements of mercy ministries.

A consumeristic mindset may look at these five areas and wonder what exactly the pastor

does. When someone comes to the church with an idea or an ability, and yet does not plug it in,

one of the things that a pastor like me has to do is to remind them that they are the body of

Christ. They are not the paying customer and I am not the vending machine or the circus clown.

They must know two things that will protect us all from the extremes. 1. We value how God has

gifted them and can’t wait for them to exercise their gifts; and 2. each ministry has biblical

contours over which elders have an interest. It is a wide open field and yet it is not a blank check.

If they are sincere about this or that missing element of our church, then such a balance should

come as good news to them.

The norms for my office should serve that mission or purpose of the church as a whole.

This is the point where I want to make a very strong claim on behalf of the theologically active

pastor. When non-teaching leaders are the chief leaders, the gift of teaching is marginalized and

often banished; yet when the teaching gift leads, all of the other gifts make sense and are given

definition. The reason for this can be seen in a metaphor I have often used: “Sound doctrine is

the DNA of the body of Christ.” Hands and feet do not code information. Information issues

forth into hands and feet. For that same reason, sound doctrine gives the campus minister and the

pianist their reason for being, protecting their evangelism and worship from becoming something

else.
 !12

Any teaching pastor who has a mature system of theology will have no trouble

integrating the aforementioned five functions of the church. He may be personally weaker in one

area that another (I am), but one’s theological vision must have no trouble fitting each of these

five functions. I do not personally foster community well, but nothing in my doctrine hinders it.

More than that, everything in my doctrine demands it. So I will aggressively encourage those

who are gifted in those areas to make events and relationships happen.

One word about how we will balance the unity of the body in our region with our own

particular vision. Although we are functionally independent, we are “presbyterian in spirit.” This

will mean two things. First, we will want to take steps toward affiliation during the next few

years: whether that is with the PCA, the OPC, or with some network that may emerge among

independents. Second, we will utilize the Westminster Standards and PCA Book of Church Order

as our “provisional constitution.” Obviously any reference to the higher courts of appeal will be

irrelevant; although we will seek the wisdom and fellowship of other pastors for many matters,

not the least of which is advice on discipline.

III. SUMMARY & SELF-REFLECTION

Gifts. The following four gifts are exactly who God has made me to be, listed in order of

“most equipped for the long haul” to “called to temporary duty”: (1) teaching theology in

seminary or Bible college; (2) writing books and articles; (3) preaching in the local church; and

(4) leadership training in the local church. If the above sections were “light on the pastoral”

components of ministry, that is an intentional reflection of my self awareness. It is not who I am

and it never will be, so far as I comprehend God’s work in me. Doing (3) and (4) to the best of
 !13

my abilities while preparing for (1) and (2) may seem awkward, but my conscience is clear on

spending the next few years on this “transition calling” referred to earlier.

Readiness. My time in pastoral ministry began in late 2003. I planted Sovereign Grace

Fellowship in 2005, The Well in 2007, and after a fourteen month “sabbatical” at RTS in

Orlando, planted PRC in 2017. Although I have been in ministry for a while and am preparing

this ship for another crew, that does not mean that I have not done some inventory. Practical

theology classes and constant observations at the three Central Florida churches attended while

on campus—St. Andrews, Reformation OPC, and River Oaks PCA—led to quite a few notes,

mental and literal. There is much they do that is worthy of emulation. I have also had a chance to

reassess my character.

One noteworthy success is the amount of interest that has always been generated by

seminary-level classes offered at the local church. This is not only something we have

experienced on the BSU campus. Even at the church building there has always been a full

classroom, often over twenty students at a time. From my perspective this signals a hunger is

average adult Christians in the life of the mind. Many want to know the Scriptures and they do

not accept the dichotomy between worldview thinking and humble life application. But beyond

this, this success makes leadership training intelligible. Now there is always one disgruntled

critic at a time pointing to this as “making the church into a seminary.” However the years and

numbers are against the critic on this. I hate to put it like this, but it may be the only language the

pragmatist can understand: There just is “a market” for the depths of God’s truth. Although I am

painfully aware of how “teaching groupies” can form at a church, a following that is always
 !14

chasing books or teachers or blogs, but never learning and applying in a spiritual manner; yet I

see a different culprit in this than the classroom format per se, or the level of depth.

Particular Sense of Call. How many years is meant by “a few years” for this transition? I

cannot say. Literally. James 4:13-16 says it is not really a good idea to speak with certainty about

such things. School alone makes the bare minimum two years. Getting our oldest into college

and our second mature enough to take another move: that is a little more difficult to tell.

What I am called to—both in the short term and long term—is in concert with how my

gifts have been described and ordered above. I do not pretend to know what the future holds in

terms of specific employment. However I do believe that God ordained the events of 2014 to

2016, as painful as they were, to land me at RTS for a reason. I do not believe that this reason

was simply to readvance on the spiritual terrain of Boise from another position (to torture out of

context the saying of General MacArthur). Rather it is my sense that after my MDiv is complete

I will be pursuing my PhD, hopefully at Aberdeen University, with an eye toward teaching

systematic theology and other related subjects wherever the Lord should want me to teach.

Strengths and Weaknesses. Once again there are plenty of weakness that I have as a

pastor. Due to the stage that I am at, there is the advantage of open, honest delegating of virtually

all things expected of pastors that I am not good at. That is not to say that my “strength-weakness

ratio” is at some fool-proof level. A series of health problems that became intensified before my

“seminary sabbatical” began have gradually resurfaced. I suspect that this will present a

challenge if the aforementioned transition does not go smoothly and timely.

Two weaknesses of mine, especially in the last few years of ministry, have been prayer

and leading in family worship. Acts 6:4 describes the job description of the elders as a devotion
 !15

“to prayer and to the ministry of the word.” In the early days of church planting prayer meetings

were plentiful. Small groups praying for each other were a regular occurence. While I would

never have described myself as a “prayer warrior,” leading in family worship used to be a

strength. It was the norm, for a whole decade, to have family worship at least three times a week,

and very often more. What happened to both of these disciplines coincided with the

aforementioned end of ministry prior to seminary sabbatical. However I want to make it clear

that these are my fault. I needed prayer more during this time, not less, and likewise my family

needed my spiritual leadership all the more as everything else around us seemed to crumble. The

two disciplines are coming back together in recent weeks during the course of this class.

IV. PASTOR / MENTOR ASSESSMENT

A fellow local pastor (who I will leave anonymous in this posted version) has graciously

agreed to provide feedback to this statement. This will be divided into three sections: (1)

Questions regarding the five ministry functions; (2) Observations on the five ministry

functions; and (3) Advice on those ministry functions and beyond. My interaction will be

included throughout with the Pastor’s written feedback, which will be in quotations and italics.

There was no surprise to him concerning the particulars of my calling. These are things I have

discussed with him before and so it is enough to echo his words on that point: “I do think it

reflects you.”

(1) QUESTIONS. “Under Worship: Will you be active in shaping the liturgy and still be

the “worship guy” as the pastor? What will make worship “reformed” in your philosophy om

ministry? Is there a difference between a reformed principle of worship and the regulative
 !16

principle? Does everything that goes on your reformed church count as being reformed? What

liberties and principles or circumstance and elements do you distinguish in your philosophy of

worship?” The short answer here is that not everything will be as “Reformed” as in the Dutch or

Presbyterian churches. I wish it could be (to a certain extent); but what will make it Reformed is:

1. insisting upon the semper reformanda principle stated in the introduction; and 2. having the

service be entirely under elder oversight. The Worship course at RTS and two books by Old4

were enough to persuade me the rest of the way about the spirituality of a carefully constructed,

Bible-saturated order of worship, especially leading the whole congregation in prayer. As to

elements versus circumstances, the elements I would take to be the Word, sacraments, public

prayer, and public reading of Scripture (beyond just the text to be preached upon), and the

singing of songs. At PRC we do have a call to worship and benediction, but other things such as

collective confession and responsive reading, these we will only work in periodically and

monitor how it takes.

“Under Discipleship: Will those shepherding and discipling aspects be declarative

through preaching and teaching, pulpit and lectern primarily? Is there room here in your

philosophy for seeking one on one interactions, spending and wasting time productively with

individuals?” Aside from whether he means “wasting” time ironically, I would say Yes and No.

But he already has the key word down—primarily—and probably has a sense of how I would

answer. The one on one time will be important, but it will be targeted and therefore used

sparingly for leadership training. Many will object to this; but I remember that Jesus specifically

spent more intensified time with his group of twelve than he did with the crowds. There are

4 cf. Hughes Oliphant Old. Leading in Prayer and Worship: Reformed According to Scripture
 !17

likely a few things about Jesus’ training of the twelve that are not normative for us. Here I think

is one transferable principle: We invest in the body to the degree that we increase the ministry of

the Word; and we increase that ministry by multiplying its able handlers. As I have already

indicated, the Pastoral Letters seem to bear this out.

(2) OBSERVATIONS. “Under Community: I like your reference to C. S. Lewis, about

how the opening expression of friendship is something like “What? You too? I thought I was the

only one…” Somehow we need to help people inculcate the step that moves them from greeters to

meeting people through the discovery of common ground. Your personality whether you are an

extrovert or introvert helps and hinders in this manner and sometimes you need to step out of

your comfort zone to make it happen.” I can’t argue with this. Although for the record, I am an

“androvert,” if the discussion of that term in Meuther’s class last year is correct. That is, I

actually like being around people (not the introvert) but I would rather be reading a book in their

presence or talking to them about the substance of such books, not chit-chatting (the introvert).

He makes with one point a helpful pushback on two points I made. My philosophy

privileges the teaching leader because of how the teaching gives shape to the rest of the body. I

also mentioned that when the gospel is taught in the “indicative” (e. g. Jesus paid it all, therefore

you respond to grace) rather than in the “imperative” (Come and join us on Jesus’ mission), this

keep legalism at bay. The Pastor adds to this: “The people who show up in our churches will in

some way reflect how our philosophy of ministry is perceived by them. If teaching is stressed

over everything else, there will be those who won’t be taught who nevertheless redirect this

atmosphere into their own exacting legalism and eccentricities. On the other hand, a libertine

spirit can be attracted to sensitivity ministries without theological structure. Our strengths as
 !18

well as our weaknesses can be an indication of our challenges.” I completely agree with this. In

fact I have also seen even deep gospel teaching turned into one more product for a consumerist

mentality. And of course there will always be an “arms-folded” contingent who is there almost in

spite of the point of the teaching. Points granted. So how do we war against it? For me it is

pointed application done minus the headhunting from the pulpit. This is a difficult balance at

times, but I think there is a way to address the consumer as someone who needs to either get on

mission and hear the voice of the King without saying it in a way that is needlessly offensive or

seen to be directed at individuals in a petty way.

(3) ADVICE. “Under evangelism … Encouragements to make evangelism/missions

indigenous to the character of the church members will be ongoing as you and others equip the

church for ministry.” Agreed. One way we have done this so far is with our Academy. It is

essentially a homeschooling co-op that meets once a week and is opened to the public. In Idaho

this can be huge, as there is always an influx of people who are looking for relationship based on

their educational choices. The same idol-potential exists here as in the larger concept of

“missional.” Our choice of curriculum and self-made schoolhouse can become the gospel. One

obvious antidote is the theology class (we have biblical and systematic) that is gospel-centered

and brings nominally Christian parents and their kids into some exposure to Reformed theology.

As the “works of mercy” section seems underdeveloped he suggested a few resources: “Tim

Keller’s “Resources for Deacons”, David Apple’s, “Not Just a Soup Kitchen: How Mercy

Ministry in the Local Church Transforms Us All” and Fikkert and Corbett’s “When Helping

Hurts” and he adds: “It would be good to explore the extent to which you will partner with

“para-church” ministries and how you will bring a philosophy of works of mercy to the
 !19

diaconate and congregation.” No doubt this will be the most unnatural of the five ministry areas

for me to coordinate. Although it is not necessarily for me to coordinate, but perhaps only to

provide a solid doctrinal framework for those so gifted to begin such ministries.

Lastly he says: “You concluded your section on Primary Functions by addressing the

functionally independent nature of your church plant. It would be wise to keep before your

congregation your goal - if it is a goal of bringing this body into the fellowship of a connectional

church. You pointed to the possibility of the PCA or OPC. Operate in such a way that you

create that as a necessity. Labor to do that sooner rather than later. It is harder to make changes

and adhere or subscribe to the expectations, doctrinal standards and church order of a broader

body when you had the liberty to pick from the smorgasbord of your preferences. There is a

sense that to be an Independent Reformed/Presbyterian congregation is an oxymoron.” That last

sentence especially has always stung a bit. I don’t want to disagree. But what does one do when

seminary will not be done for a while and my family needs me to finish strong for my older kids

especially? There are no presbyteries in sight. Even if there was I would have no time.

Sometimes being independent is not about being a maverick or being novel. Sometimes we

simply do not have a choice. Why not the URC then? We thought about that when we first

formed the church. One consideration is switching over standards from the Westminster to the

Heidelberg. Though this is certainly not a deal breaker, the time element still looms large.
 !20

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bucer, Martin. Concerning the True Care of Souls. Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, 2009

Clowney, Edmund. Called to the Ministry. Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian & Reformed, 1964

Keller, Tim. Center Church. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2012

Lewis, C. S. The Four Loves. New York: Harcourt & Brace, 1960

Machen, J. Gresham. Christianity and Liberalism. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1923

Old, Hughes Oliphant. Leading in Prayer. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1995

Old, Hughes Oliphant. Worship: Reformed According to Scripture. Louisville, KY: Westminster

John Knox Press, 2002

Purves, Andrew. Pastoral Theology in the Classical Tradition. Louisville, KY: Westminster John

Knox Press, 2001

Watson, Thomas. All Things for Good. Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, 1998