“But encourage one another daily, as long as it is called Today, so that none of you may be hardened by sin’s deceitfulness” (Hebrews 3:13); “And let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds” (Hebrews 10:24).

One of the most common misunderstandings among church members is that we hire pastors as the professional Christians who will do all of the work among the members and then preach to us on Sundays. Yet, in the Word of God, the pastors are to equip the saints (believing members) for “their works of ministry” (Ephesians 4:11-12). 

The two verses above from Hebrews are spoken to Christians—not just pastors. In the Hebrews 3 passage we are told that we are to encourage other believers on a daily basis so their hearts will not be hardened. Note that this encouragement is to be on a daily basis (not just on Sundays). 

The Hebrews 10 passage instructs us that we are to consider how we may help others on toward love and good deeds. In order for us to do this, we must know the flock. Again, these words are addressed to believers, not just to pastors. 

There are many other verses which instruct us as believers (and members of a local church) to be about the business of ministry among our fellow believers. We are told that pure religion is to look after orphans and widows (James 1:17), we are instructed to build up others (1 Thessalonians 5:11); to comfort others (1 Thessalonians 4:18); to encourage others (1 Thessalonians 5:11); to counsel others (Romans 15:14); to abound in love for others (1 Thessalonians 3:12); to bear others’ burdens (Galatians 6:2); to teach and admonish each other (Colossians 3:16); to speak to each other in psalms, hymns and spiritual songs (Ephesians 5:1); to submit to one another (Ephesians 5:21) and to pray for each other (James 5:16).

These instructions, addressed to all believers, cannot be carried out on Sunday alone. They must be attended to daily as we serve among the members of our local body. When one uses the term “ministry” we ordinarily think of the work of the pastor. Certainly he has a special obligation to the flock, but the New Testament also calls on each of us to care for our fellow members, looking upon their needs as our responsibilities. 

This caring could be carried out in their homes, on the job, at school, in the hospital, at a nursing home, perhaps even in a jail. It involves getting to know our fellow members and their families, learning what spiritual, physical and financial needs they have.

Often we have a tendency to spend time with those members who are popular and with whom we feel most comfortable, but usually they are the ones with the fewest needs. The most lonely and those who are all alone, are the ones who really need us. Perhaps that is why our Lord labeled pure religion as when one cares for orphans and widows, for usually there are no returns or reciprocity. 

Here are some practical suggestions and considerations to help us to obey the Lord in the area of visitation:

• Don’t expect the pastor to do it; look upon it as your responsibility.

• Consider it a privilege to serve the Lord and His people in this manner.

• Ask God to help you determine just how you can serve in this capacity.

• Set some reasonable goals or expectations; otherwise you may continually put it off.

• Choose a companion to go with you and to encourage your responsibility in this area.

• Make a list of those people in your congregation whom you do not know and plan to get to know them.

• Make a list of those people in your congregation whom you suspect have spiritual, family, physical, or financial needs.

• Determine the needs with which you feel capable of helping.

• Plan to spend time with these individuals or families. Keep in mind it does not have to be a formal visit. It could be just shopping together, picnicking or enjoying a hobby together.

• Organize others to help you with larger needs.

• Keep your pastors, elders and deacons informed of the needs, especially if you are not capable of helping meet those needs. Ask for their help.

• Certain personal needs will require confidentiality. Don’t violate their trust by talking to others.

• Pray with these members. If exhortation is needed, do so firmly, but lovingly.

• Do not promise them help and then drop the matter. People who have previously suffered disappointment need to have those on whom they can depend.

• Do not promise the impossible. There will be serious problems—such as deep financial troubles, which neither you nor the church has sufficient resources to resolve.

• Always exhibit genuine joy and hope. Through Christ there should always be hope and joy.

As you work among the membership of your local church, you are going to come across a large variety of problems and needs in the body. They will range across the entire spectrum and will vary from individual to individual and from family to family. Here are some of the ones you will meet:

• Depression

• Anger

• Loneliness

• Marital disputes, separations, divorces

• Rebellious children

• Drug, alcohol and sexual abuse

• Immorality

• Financial irresponsibility, debts, credit card abuse

• Spiritual laziness

• Physical illnesses

• Houses and family schedules in disarray

• Unforgiving spirit

• Unemployment and despair

• Disinterest in church attendance

• Illegal activities, tax abuse

• Incorrect theology

• Lack of family prayer and worship

• Weak faith

• Lack of joy

• Grief over the loss of a loved one

• Wrong priorities

Obviously there will be many good things you will discover also, but this list highlights just a few of the various needs you will encounter.

Adam’s sin had a tremendous impact upon the human race. He plunged us into sin, ruin and misery, and we are called upon by our Lord to help our fellow members as they struggle in this fallen world. But keep in mind the deep satisfaction you will find when you help others recover, and then get to see them keep the cycle going as they, in turn, help others.

You will not learn of these problems and needs on Sunday mornings. But you will become aware of their existence as you regularly visit among members and really get to know the people of your local church.

This article is an excerpt from Curtis Thomas’ book – Life in the Body of Christ: Privileges and Responsibilities in the Local Church. A new hardcover edition is now available for order for $24.98 at press.founders.org

This edition of the Founders Journal puts together articles on a broad spectrum of specific topics but all informed by the big ideas of the Reformed Confessional heritage.  

Ottavio Palombaro, in addition to having gained a (Th.D.), also gained a Ph. D. in economic sociology along with a BA in cultural anthropology. His expertise includes a wide range of theological, sociological, philosophical, linguistic, and musicological subjects. His article in the Founders Journal focuses on John Knox and his biblical/theological/existential interaction with the question of female leadership broadly conceived. He describes the purpose of the article as an evaluation of “whether the view of John Knox on gender and leadership was Biblical and what lesson can be learned from the controversy between John Knox and queen Mary as applied to today’s shifts in gender and sexuality both in society and in the church.” As a fundamental principle of biblical presentation, Knox said, “So I say, that in her greatest perfection, woman was created to be subject to man.” That principle then is teased out through actual biblical phenomena as noted by Knox and elucidated by Palombaro. To those who may be deluged by post-modern standards having the shock of Knox come before them, concluding that he was a “horrid man,” the author noted that “they are using modern glasses in retrospection, neglecting the contextual historical as well as cultural realm into which Knox blew his apocalyptic trumpet.” None can doubt that Knox was a Calvinist, indeed a fully convinced Reformer with a biblical worldview, but, as Palombaro observes, that does not mean that he was a chauvinist. Rather that could mean that he had a more profound and excellent regard for femaleness than any of today’s so-called egalitarians. Judging from Knox’s grasp of biblical womanhood, Palombaro writes, “Just as women are to submit to their husband in the family, and just as men should be pastor in the church, so the issue of women in the military or transgender males playing female athletics are examples of how Knox had a point in his consideration upon human constitution.” This is a highly relevant and salubrious sip drawn from an aged and tested wineskin.

Chris Osterbrock earned the D. Ed. Min. in Biblical Spirituality from The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. Presently he is a PhD Student in Historical Theology, Puritan Reformed Theological Seminary. He serves as senior pastor of First Baptist Church of Wellsboro, PA. and is author of What is Saving Faith? Chris presents us with a symphony and chorus of inexhaustible beauty in the “The Stingless Death,.” While this theme of Christ’s victory over death, even the wages of sin, is a universal Christian theme, the author focuses on the Baptist tradition of interpretation and practical application of 1 Corinthians 15:55. Keach, Gill, Wallin, Booth, Fuller, Ryland, Jr., Boyce, and several others have their say on this triumphant song. Osterbrock notes, “The individual authors may elucidate different sides of the gemstone, but Particular Baptist tradition holds together a cohesive interpretation. Herein we examine how this verse was understood in Baptist life through 200 years.” Among the facets of this scriptural gem, Baptist exposition has explained “the providence of God in death, a secured new life to come, a song to be sung in sanctification as well as glorification, and a song applied as a salve to extinguish sin in the present life.” It has given rise to celebrative imagery of intense poetic impulse such as the exclamation of Abraham Booth, “Thy haggard form I plainly discern; but where, where is thy sting? . . . for, behold! Thy sting is entirely and eternally gone. Jesus, the glorious victor, has plucked it from thee.” And finally, this ultimate enemy becomes the path to unblemished holiness. “Here in death,” the author deduces from the expositions investigated, “the Christian finds perfect mortification of sin and depravity, and in death there is the perfect sanctification of the body and soul for glory.”

Craig Biehl earned his Th.M. from Dallas Theological Seminary and a Ph.D. in Systematic Theology from Westminster Theological Seminary. His books deal with the power of Reformed theology in promoting Christian spirituality, the power of orthodox thought, and the futile systems promoted by unbelief. In his article, “Are God’s Justice and Mercy Incompatible?” Craig Biehl unfolds the consistency of biblical orthodoxy to engage serious philosophical objections to the Christian doctrine of God. Letting Theodore M. Drange speak for one specific argument against the existence of God, he sets forth this supposedly inescapable moral dilemma. A god who is just—and a god must be just—would “treat every offender with exactly the severity deserved.” But a god must show the tenderness of mercy and so would treat “every offender with less severity” than deserved. Since these necessary attributes for a god contradict, a god cannot exist. Mercy perverts justice, and justice militates against mercy. Biehl brings to this unbreakable dilemma the biblical teachings on the person of Christ and the nature of the atoning work of Christ. “As a man, Christ was the perfect substitute for mankind. As God and man, He was the perfect mediator between God and man. And as God, His suffering and death paid an infinite penalty for the sin of mankind. This He did once for all time, never to be repeated.” The substitutionary, propitiatory atonement made by Christ in covenant obedience to the Father fully satisfies the demands of both justice and mercy. God is “just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Christ” (Romans 3:26 NASB). Does this violate either absolute justice or the extension of mercy to the violator of God’s law? Biehl shows that “In this way, salvation by faith upholds God’s righteous justice. ‘Do we then nullify the Law through faith? May it never be! On the contrary, we establish the Law’ (Rom 3:31).” In this justice-is-contrary-to-mercy objection to the God of the Bible we have “an example of what besets the best of atheistic arguments.” As Creator, Sustainer, and Judge—and whose image actually establishes all the rules of logic, justice, compassion—God solves this apparent moral contradiction “according to His wisdom.” But, as Biehl points out, even this infinitely powerful, logically consistent, and surpassingly wise solution appears to rebellious man as foolishness. But to those who believe, it is the power of God and the wisdom of God.

Robert Gonzalez, Academic Dean and a professor of Reformed Baptist Seminary since 2005,  in “The Saving Design of God’s Common Grace” gives an exposition of this fundamental biblical proposition: though common grace “does not guarantee the salvation of its recipients,” it is nevertheless “saving in its design.” In accord with Romans 2, “God sincerely intends the kindness and patience he shows to all sinners (whether elect or non-elect) to lead them unto saving repentance.” After arguing this case with careful exegesis and in interaction with the hyper-Calvinist wing of theologians, Gonzalez concludes “from the evidence above we may conclude a saving design in the indiscriminate common grace God showers on all men whether elect or non-elect.”

This is of the nature of a Gospel Worthy of All Acceptation theological idea. Although it is perfectly just and holy for God to allow humanity to choose its own course of action on the basis of its preferences, God’s calls to believe the gospel or repent heartily from sin are in their nature calls for restoration to a non-cursed relationship with God. He calls neither to hypocritical faith nor merely feigned repentance. He is under no moral impetus, however, to provide effectual grace by which saving faith and repentance are truly manifested. He may justly leave all men or as many as he deems it fitting and consistent with his wise decrees to continue in their course of purposeful rejection of both his moral commands or his overtures of engagement for restoration. Both the call of the gospel and the call of creation and other manifestations of common grace have as their absolute moral end a cessation of rebellion against God and an inclusion as a true worshipper of Jehovah.

Each of these articles looks seriously at the Reformed confessional stance and shows its powerful relevance to any moral, cultural, or religious issue.

It can be an inglorious task to say anything about the current generation. Some concepts that would have been considered “conventional wisdom” a few years ago and wouldn’t require a lot of explanation are now under scrutiny and being reframed in an impressive and frightening exercise of deconstructing ideas that we see today.

I want to reflect on something that seemed like commonplace knowledge not so long ago, but is now under this sort of re-signification, which is the respect for the elderly.

It seems that we live in a time when the elderly represent a way of thinking and doing things that no longer works in our society (and, to our astonishment, in some churches) and therefore it is necessary to distance oneself from them (or from us). My subject is brief and I want to deal with it in the context of the Christian faith, for my concern is with the state of the church, I mean, the state of those who professes faith in Jesus Christ.

A huge number of young people from the “Z” generation, that is, people born from 1995 and on, seem to be leading a relentless patrol to everything that stands in the way of the new ethics that the so-called “woke” movement established as the immutable clause of our society. This new ethics is comprehensive and incorporates practically all the ideas that have emerged from the progressive narratives of the last 25 years that give new guidelines on what it means to live well in society. The escalation of change in core values was very fast, and, it seems it started to be implemented even more aggressively after the 2020 pandemic. From areas related to the environment to complex issues in medicine, science, politics, sexuality, psychology and religion, in short, for everything there is a new norm that does not accept any discussion. Its imposition becomes violent, whether due to the cancellation culture, very strong in the press and social media environment, or, even more dangerous, as we see in Western governments, due to the creation of new bills and jurisprudence that criminalize public opinion and the discussion of ideas. Thinking in an old-fashioned way in the 2023 can be very dangerous and even get one arrested.

It is curious, however, that the method of this new ethics takes place through the fragmentation of truth, through the end of empiricism and common wisdom and through the use of broken narratives, disconnected of a metanarrative in favor of a broad pluralism. This has been called post-truth and means that each person or social group has its own truth and values, which can never be questioned.

It is very disconcerting to realize that this trend has infiltrated the Christian church as well. Many among God’s people are strongly influenced by this new post-truth ethics and begin to confuse Christian ethics with the new (and suffocating) ideas that regulate the life of Western society in this 21st century. Alisa Childers, American Christian author, addressed this issue in her moving testimony published in book form under the title Another Gospel? A response to progressive Christianity, and also in here more recent title, Live your Truth.

But I digress. Let me get back to the point. Elders are being canceled left and right and it is happening in the church too, right under our nose. So, let me first bring the biblical principle to tackle this issue.

The fifth commandment of the Decalogue, written by God’s own hand (and spoken before His people in the Sinai) says: “Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long in the land that the Lord your God is giving you”. 

In this commandment, God’s people are called to love and obey their parents. A first and important element that must be highlighted is that the commandment is not addressed to children only, but to all who have living parents (Proverbs 19:26; 23:22). This commandment, in distinction from most commandments in the Decalogue, is put in positive terms and, furthermore, is bound up with a promise. The promise has to do with the effects of obedience. As we see in the wisdom books of the Bible, taking good advice from our parents, listening to and respecting our elders, dealing respectfully with authorities are generally attitudes that will prolong one’s days and make life easier. Add to this the fact that God himself promises to bless those who seek to keep the fifth commandment and preserve its spirit.

The expression “honor” comes from the Hebrew kabod and has a sense of weight, importance, glory and prestige. It is the respect that an inferior offers to a superior. The Westminster Larger Catechism, in question 126, proposes that the scope of the fifth commandment is the performance of those duties which we mutually owe in our several relations, as inferiors, superiors or equals.

The Reformers went even further and expanded the understanding of this commandment to all who are in authority over us—primarily and immediately our parents, but also the elderly, the magistrate, educators, and spiritual fathers. French reformer John Calvin, commenting on the fifth commandment, highlighted three expressions of honor—“reverence, obedience, and recognition”—and demonstrates how the principle of honoring parents can extend to all in position of authority: magistrates, elders, fathers in faith, pedagogues. In his elaboration, Calvin will condition this obedience to obedience “in the Lord” (Ephesians 6.1).

A very important point of the commandment is that honor, respect and consideration begin in the heart. Reverence for our parents and other authority figures should be a reflection and evidence of our honor and reverence for God in the first place.

Reverence for our parents and other authority figures should be a reflection and evidence of our honor and reverence for God in the first place.

We also read in Leviticus 19:32: “You shall stand up before the gray head and honor the face of an old man, and you shall fear your God: I am the Lord.” Proverbs 16:31 and 20:29 reinforce the teaching of Scripture that elders should be honored. This principle is there because normally the elderly are associated with maturity, experience, wisdom, and the accumulation of knowledge and a better sense of realism of life. In the Bible, the elderly are treated as a reservoir of tradition, of family history, as the living archive of a society that lives through oral tradition. 

The influence of the Christian faith in the world did a good job of carrying this principle of life forward. Societies that preserve the value of respecting their elders are usually prosperous and very well organized.

It must be said, however, that not every elderly person is wise and a model for others. We have examples of old men in Scripture who were involved in awful sins, and it is possible that some old men and women hold very immature standards or find themselves involved in ugly sins. Therefore, associating maturity with age can be a mistake. Nineteenth-century Austrian author Hugo Hoffmanstall, in his book The Book of Friends, said: “Precocious children and immature old men there are plenty in certain states in which the world sometimes finds itself.” The Portuguese poet Antero de Quental made a harsh comment to a foe of his, an already old man, saying: “I get up when Your Excellency’s white hair pass before me. But the mischievous brain that is underneath and the garish little things that come out of it, I confess, do not deserve my admiration….Futility in an old man disgusts me as much as injudiciousness in a child. Your Excellency needs fifty years less age or, then, more fifty years of reflection.”

But I perceive with concern a certain anti-elder movement in our days, and our evangelical camps are not immune to this attitude, on the contrary. The desire to remove the most experienced from the center of ideas and discussions is becoming stronger each day. The Internet is the space where this is most strongly manifested. Such an attitude is sometimes veiled, sometimes explicit; sometimes unnoticed, sometimes intentional; but it’s real.

Some, like Dr. John McArthur Jr., for example, have lived long enough to become subject of controversy, vicious attacks and harsh criticism from people within the Christian church. Men like R. C. Sproul, J. I. Packer, Wayne Grudem, John Piper, Voddie Bauchan to name a few of the “international” gospel ministers who have blessed the Christian church in their own country and whose influence reached thousands upon thousands in Brazil and elsewhere, are now under enormous scrutiny, suspicion and attacks of all kinds, some even targeting their character.

I guess, on the other hand, the older generation might acknowledge that at some point we might have lost the ability to speak up to this younger generation, reaching out to them with patience and grace. But this is another matter for a future article.

The point is that I have seen many young people (and others not so young, but with the very much in-tune with this new approach), seeking their place of speech, their platform and their role in teaching so they can show that they also have a voice, an opinion, an idea that needs to prevail. They want to make the case that they are sensitive to the new causes and demands that society places before the church and that they should be heard; but there is a problem: the old pastors, theologians and professors who have a distinguished position are still alive or, those who have died, still exert an uncomfortable influence. They need to be silenced. I feel in this attitude something similar to the young man who asked his father who was still alive “his share of the inheritance” (Luke 15.12).

Furthermore, it must be said that many of those who seek to occupy the spaces of the elderly still do not have much of a life experience, much church ground, so to say, and really much to offer. All they have is their opinion and their complaints. Their criticism mostly comes with the weight of hammer, seeking for validation and applause in through social media, but it’s all very acidic and very virtual, with little or no fruit.

It is not rare, however, that this tough stance and criticism towards the elderly, generated in the superficial environment of social media have their origin in people who possibly never had the opportunity to exchange a single word with their targets (who become slogans or an idea), never visited their homes, never been to their churches or talked to their church members, and who rarely read more than a few lines of their writings (probably just the excerpts that ended up on the internet) and, worse , their criticism reach people all sorts of people indistinctly, including many neophytes, who in the end will reproduce this procedure, in an endless loop, making everything very public, very ugly.

To mention a few familiar examples, I single out J. I. Packer, Martin Lloyd-Jones and Iain Murray (the latter still alive in his 90s), who rediscovered the Puritans in the 1940s and shed new light on the their teaching. R. C. Sproul defended biblical inerrancy in the 1970s, and vigorously emphasized the biblical teaching on justification by grace through faith alone and the holiness of God. John MacAthur Jr. rescued and defended the doctrine of the lordship of Christ in the Christian life in the 1980s. John Piper taught about the joy of life by faith and fellowship with Christ in the 1990s. Wayne Gruden emphasized the biblical teaching on the dignity both man and woman, bearers God’s image, each one having harmonious and complementary role defined by God in Revelation and in their very physical constitution. Tedd Tripp has helped thousands of people realize the importance of reaching our children’s hearts with the life-changing truth of God’s Word. Men such as Voddie Baucham who have stood up for marriage between a man and a woman and the importance of educating our children in the ways of the Lord. All these men suddenly became targets of cancelation, open criticism and controversy. 

Scripture exhorts us to be grateful for God’s gifts in life of the church and to acknowledge the benefits of grace in the lives of those who trod hard paths and broke down stones harder than ours. Our elders in the church are our fathers in the faith and worthy of our honor, that we stand before their gray hairs.

Our elders in the church are our fathers in the faith and worthy of our honor, that we stand before their gray hairs.

Many of our elders have their struggles, it is true, they have their blind spots, their areas of failure and contradictions. But the reality is that we all have them. After all, we are all outside the garden Eden. Our elders may have made mistakes in some of their emphases and even in certain omissions, but what we do is cover their nakedness (Genesis 9.23) and not expose them to public spectacle, cancellation and mockery.

It’s one thing to fight heresy, false teachers, charlatans of faith, impostors – and these are doing a lot of damage. But it is something else to expose men of God who may have failed at some point in their ministry to public reproach and the court of social media. And even the measurement of ministerial failures needs a very honest and judicious judgment, which ideally should happen in the covenantal end godly context of the local community and never in the few characters of social networks.

Brazilian writer Machado de Assis said in his tale  “Relíquias da Casa Velha” that “it is not enough to be right, one must know how to be right”. This is wise. It is a good principle that the Lord Jesus and his apostles taught. The purpose of discipline is to win the sinner and not to destroy him (Matt. 18:15). If we have to correct someone, let it be to win the person. If we have to prevent mistakes, let it be through propositional and preventive teaching. Let our exhortations, and admonitions be tempered with respect, consideration, and love, and let them take place within the safe space of the church ground through mature conversation of edification. Otherwise, we won’t have much more than the exposure of partial and sometimes biased opinions, which can stimulate hatred and prejudice to an indistinct public and without any condition to promote healthy changes. That’s not how we do things.

We are all called to honor the gray hairs, to be grateful for God’s gifts to the church, and to sit at the feet of our elders with reverence, respect, and deference, like the fathers in the faith that they are. This will also teach our children, it will teach our churches, it will teach society outside the church how we deal with things: with the principle of grace, respect, forgiveness, redemption and mercy. If these virtues do not guide our zeal, all we will have to offer is resentment, bitterness, vanities and a lot of self-righteousness.

We do well to remember that God is also referred to in the Word as “Ancient of Days” (Daniel 7.9) and his wisdom is much more ancient than all of us combined.