這個問題並不是今天才出現。事實上，十六、十七世紀的重洗派和早期浸信會先賢所關心的，也正是這個問題。他們所處的時代，大部分人一出生便自動成為「基督徒」，教會與國家緊密結合，宗教身份往往與政治身份混雜在一起。人們可以在完全沒有個人信仰經歷的情況下接受嬰兒洗禮，也可以在從未真正跟隨基督的情況下被視為教會的一員。在這樣的背景下，一些人開始重新閱讀新約，並逐漸產生一個問題：如果一個人從未真正相信基督，只因出生在基督教國家便被稱為基督徒，那麼這真的是聖經所描繪的教會嗎？如果一間教會擁有完整制度、莊嚴建築、主教體系和龐大組織，但裡面的人卻沒有真實跟隨基督，這仍然是主所建立的教會嗎？¹
正是在這樣的掙扎之中，重洗派和後來的浸信會逐漸提出一個簡單卻革命性的信念：教會首先不是一個國家機構，也不是一個宗教組織，更不是一套制度系統；教會首先是一群願意跟隨耶穌基督的人。教會之所以存在，不是因為擁有某種法律地位，也不是因為擁有某種治理架構，而是因為有一群人因著福音被召聚在一起，共同承認耶穌基督是主，並願意一生跟隨祂。換句話說，教會的本質，不在於組織，而在於門徒；不在於結構，而在於生命；不在於制度本身，而在於一群願意彼此同行的人。²
也正因如此，許多我們今天熟悉的浸信會特色，其實都是從這個信念延伸出來，而不是相反。因為教會是一群門徒，所以加入教會不應該只是出生或文化傳承，而應該出於個人的信心，因此浸信會強調信徒洗禮；因為教會是一群門徒，所以每一位信徒都直接向基督負責，因此發展出信徒皆祭司的傳統；因為教會是一群門徒，所以整個群體都需要共同尋求神的帶領，因此形成地方教會自治和會眾治理的實踐。換句話說，浸信會最深層的神學，其實從來不是「如何管理教會」，而是「什麼是真正的教會」。³
當然，這並不意味著制度不重要，也不意味著教會只要有愛、有關係，就不再需要結構和治理。事實上，浸信會歷史本身便證明了這一點。會友大會、執事會、章程、地方教會自治，甚至不同形式的領導架構，都是浸信會歷史發展的一部分。某程度上，這些制度本身也是神所賜予教會的恩典，它們幫助群體建立秩序、承擔責任，也保護教會不至於完全依賴某一位領袖或某一種屬靈魅力。因此，問題從來不是制度與生命二選一，也不是組織與群體彼此對立。沒有制度的群體，很容易陷入混亂；只有制度而缺乏生命的群體，則可能逐漸失去方向。真正值得反思的，也許不是我們是否擁有制度，而是我們是否仍然記得制度原本想保護的是什麼。⁴
從這個角度來看，浸信會所理解的教會，既不是一個沒有秩序的有機共同體，也不是一部運作良好的宗教機器，而是一個由門徒所組成、並透過各種制度彼此守護的群體。制度不是門徒生命的對立面，反而應該成為門徒生命得以被保護和培育的器皿。
這也是為什麼《使徒行傳》第十五章對浸信會傳統具有如此深遠的意義。當然，這一章並不是一幅沒有領袖的圖畫。彼得的見證、保羅和巴拿巴的分享，以及雅各最後的總結，都顯示出使徒和長老在群體中具有特殊的職分和影響力。特別是雅各在討論後的總結，更明顯地扮演著帶領群體形成共識的重要角色。然而，值得注意的是，這些領袖並不是單獨作出決定，也不是以權威壓制討論，而是在整個教會共同參與的過程中，引導群體一起辨識神的心意。因此，《使徒行傳》第十五章所呈現的，並不是沒有領袖的群體，而是一個在領袖帶領之下，共同尋求神旨意的群體。也正因如此，「聖靈和我們定意」（徒十五28）這句話才顯得如此美麗。它既不是少數人的決定，也不是沒有方向的民主討論，而是在聖靈帶領下，領袖與群體共同辨識所形成的見證。⁵
這也是為什麼今天許多加拿大華人浸信會所面對的挑戰，雖然表面上看起來各不相同，深處卻可能指向同一個問題。無論是下一代流失、領袖承接、跨代關係、門徒培育，甚至教會未來方向的討論，很多時候我們自然會先想到制度、架構、策略和資源。然而，如果教會首先是一個門徒群體，那麼這些問題最終所指向的，或許並不只是如何重新安排事工，而是如何重新建立生命的形成。
因為下一代是否留下來，未必首先取決於制度是否完善，而在於他們是否曾經在群體中經歷信仰；領袖是否能夠承接，也未必首先取決於組織架構，而在於是否有人願意長時間同行和培育；跨代是否能夠連結，也不只是活動安排的問題，而是不同世代是否真正建立了生命的關係。若教會首先是一個門徒群體，那麼真正的更新，最終或許不會從新的制度開始，而會從新的關係、新的同行，以及重新學習一起跟隨基督開始。
回顧浸信會的歷史，我愈來愈覺得，它最珍貴的遺產或許並不是某一套治理制度，也不只是浸禮的形式，而是一個十分簡單卻極其寶貴的信念：教會是一群願意一起跟隨基督的人，而所有制度的存在，最終都只是為了保護這件事情。如果有一天，制度仍然存在，但群體不再一起尋求神；如果有一天，投票仍然存在，但門徒生命逐漸消失；如果有一天，會友大會仍然存在，但人與人之間再沒有共同跟隨主的渴望，那麼我們或許仍然保留著浸信會的形式，卻可能已經離浸信會最初想保護的東西愈來愈遠。
因此，如果第一篇所保護的是基督作教會的元首，第二篇所保護的是群體共同承擔，那麼第三篇最終想保護的，或許是一幅更美的圖畫：教會不是一部運作良好的宗教機器，也不是一個沒有秩序的鬆散群體，而是一個由門徒所組成、並透過各種制度彼此守護的共同體。所有制度的存在，最終都是為了幫助這群人，在不同世代之中，繼續學習說出那句初代教會的見證：「聖靈和我們定意。」（徒十五28）
Antony傳道
註腳
1. William R. Estep, The Anabaptist Story: An Introduction to Sixteenth-Century Anabaptism, 3rd ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), 183–205. Estep 指出，重洗派最核心的問題不是建立新的制度，而是重新尋找新約所描繪的真正教會。他們質疑國家教會模式，並強調教會應由真實信徒組成。
2. H. Leon McBeth, The Baptist Heritage: Four Centuries of Baptist Witness (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1987), 32–54. McBeth 認為，早期浸信會對教會的理解首先是「相信者的群體」（community of believers），而非國家機構或宗教組織。
3. James Leo Garrett Jr., Baptist Theology: A Four-Century Study (Macon: Mercer University Press, 2009), 169–188. Garrett 認為，浸信會對信徒洗禮、信徒皆祭司及地方教會自治的理解，都建立在「教會是一群重生門徒」這個基本信念之上。
4. Mark Dever, Nine Marks of a Healthy Church, 4th ed. (Wheaton: Crossway, 2021), 229–257；另參 John Hammett, Biblical Foundations for Baptist Churches (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2005), 135–160. Hammett 指出，浸信會從來不是反制度，而是認為制度應服務於教會生命。Dever 亦強調健康的教會需要有秩序與治理，因為結構本身也是神保守教會的工具。
5. 《使徒行傳》15:1–29；另參 Fisher Humphreys, The Way We Were: How Southern Baptists Lost Their Way and Found It Again (Macon: Smyth & Helwys, 2002), 61–75. Humphreys 認為，《使徒行傳》十五章所呈現的，不是沒有領袖的民主模式，而是在領袖帶領之下，整個群體共同辨識神旨意的圖畫。這也是浸信會「共同辨識」（communal discernment）傳統的重要基礎。
Rethinking the Church from Baptist Tradition, History and Theology
Part 3 — What Are Baptists Trying to Protect? A Reflection on the Church
In the first two essays, we explored Baptist understandings of leadership and governance. The first considered the question of who truly leads the church, while the second reflected on how a community that belongs to Christ is called to share responsibility and discern God's will together. Yet as we continue to probe these issues, it becomes increasingly apparent that leadership structures, congregational meetings, deacons' ministries, and even local church autonomy are not ends in themselves. Constitutions are not the goal, voting procedures are not the goal, and neither is autonomy itself. Behind all these outward forms lies a more fundamental question: What kind of church were Baptists ultimately trying to protect?
This question did not originate in our own day. In many respects, it was the same question that troubled the Anabaptists and early Baptists of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. They lived in a world in which church and state were deeply intertwined, and where most people became "Christians" simply by being born into a Christian society. Religious identity was often inseparable from political identity, and people could receive infant baptism and be regarded as members of the church without ever consciously trusting Christ or intentionally following Him. As some believers returned to the New Testament, they began to ask uncomfortable questions. If a person had never truly believed in Christ, yet was called a Christian merely because he had been born in a Christian nation, was this really the church described in Scripture? If a church possessed magnificent buildings, elaborate ecclesiastical structures, bishops, and impressive institutions, but lacked genuine discipleship, could it still be regarded as the church established by Christ?¹
Out of these struggles emerged a simple yet revolutionary conviction. The church is not first and foremost a state institution, a religious organization, or a system of governance. Before all else, it is a people gathered by the gospel who confess Jesus Christ as Lord and commit themselves to following Him together. The church exists not because it possesses legal status or a particular organizational structure, but because men and women have been called together by God's grace and united in their common allegiance to Christ. In this sense, the essence of the church lies not primarily in institutions, but in discipleship; not ultimately in structures, but in transformed lives; not in systems themselves, but in a community of believers committed to walking together in obedience to Jesus Christ.²
Many of the distinctive features commonly associated with Baptist life are, in fact, derived from this conviction rather than serving as its foundation. Because the church is a community of disciples, membership ought to arise from personal faith rather than mere birth or cultural inheritance, and thus Baptists have traditionally practiced believers' baptism. Because the church is a community of disciples, every believer stands directly accountable to Christ, giving rise to the doctrine of the priesthood of all believers. Because the church is a community of disciples, the entire congregation shares responsibility for seeking God's will together, leading to the development of congregational polity and local church autonomy. At its deepest level, therefore, Baptist theology has never been primarily concerned with how to manage the church, but with what constitutes a true church.³
None of this suggests that structures are unimportant or that spiritual life can flourish without order and accountability. Baptist history itself bears witness to the necessity of both. Congregational meetings, deacons' ministries, constitutions, and various forms of leadership are all part of God's gracious provision for His people. Proper structures help communities establish order, exercise responsibility, and guard against excessive dependence upon any single leader or personality. Consequently, the issue has never been a choice between life and structure, nor between community and organization. Communities without structure easily descend into disorder, while structures devoid of spiritual vitality gradually lose their purpose. The more pressing question, perhaps, is not whether we possess structures, but whether we still remember what those structures were originally intended to protect.⁴
Seen in this light, the Baptist vision of the church is neither that of an unstructured spiritual fellowship nor that of a well-functioning religious machine. Rather, it is a community of disciples whose common life is nurtured and safeguarded through structures that serve the purposes of discipleship. Structures are therefore not the enemies of spiritual life. Properly understood, they are instruments through which spiritual life is protected, cultivated, and passed on from one generation to another.
This is one reason why Acts 15 has occupied such an important place within the Baptist tradition. The chapter does not present a picture of a leaderless church. Peter bore witness, Paul and Barnabas shared their experiences, and James played a significant role in summarizing the discussion and guiding the community toward consensus. Leadership clearly existed, and certain individuals exercised particular influence within the community. Yet these leaders did not impose their conclusions through authority alone, nor did they suppress disagreement. Instead, they guided the entire church through a process of listening, testimony, discussion, and reflection, enabling the community to discern God's will together. What emerges in Acts 15 is neither authoritarian rule nor a form of directionless democracy, but a picture of leaders and congregation seeking the mind of Christ together under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. It is for this reason that the words, "It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us" (Acts 15:28), possess such enduring beauty. They testify neither to divine action without human participation nor to human decision-making apart from God's presence, but to a community discerning together under the leading of the Spirit.⁵
Perhaps this perspective also sheds light on many of the challenges facing Chinese Baptist churches in Canada today. Questions concerning the loss of the next generation, leadership succession, intergenerational relationships, discipleship, and the future direction of the church often lead us instinctively to think in terms of structures, strategies, programs, and resources. Yet if the church is fundamentally a community of disciples, these concerns ultimately point to something deeper than organizational design. The question of whether young people remain within the church may depend less upon the efficiency of its systems than upon whether they have encountered authentic faith within the life of the community. Leadership succession may depend less upon organizational charts than upon the willingness of mature believers to invest in others over many years. Likewise, intergenerational unity cannot be manufactured merely through programs or events, but grows out of genuine relationships formed through shared life. If the church is first and foremost a community of disciples, then renewal may begin not with new structures, but with renewed relationships, renewed companionship, and a renewed commitment to follow Christ together.
Looking back on Baptist history, I have increasingly come to believe that its most precious legacy is not a particular form of governance, nor even a distinctive mode of baptism. Rather, it is the conviction that the church is fundamentally a people who follow Christ together, and that every structure exists only to protect that reality. It is therefore possible for Baptist churches to retain their constitutions, their congregational meetings, and their voting procedures while gradually losing the shared desire to seek God together. When this happens, the forms of Baptist life may remain intact, even as the very thing those forms were intended to preserve quietly slips away.
If the first essay sought to protect the headship of Christ and the second emphasized the congregation's shared responsibility, then perhaps this third reflection points us toward an even more beautiful vision. The church is neither a religious machine nor a loose association of individuals. It is a community of disciples whose life together is sustained and safeguarded through structures designed to serve that common calling. Ultimately, every structure exists so that believers across generations may continue to bear the witness first expressed by the early church: "It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us."
Pastor Antony Lee
Notes
- William R. Estep, The Anabaptist Story: An Introduction to Sixteenth-Century Anabaptism, 3rd ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), 183–205.
- H. Leon McBeth, The Baptist Heritage: Four Centuries of Baptist Witness (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1987), 32–54.
- James Leo Garrett Jr., Baptist Theology: A Four-Century Study (Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 2009), 169–188.
- Mark Dever, Nine Marks of a Healthy Church, 4th ed. (Wheaton: Crossway, 2021), 229–257; John Hammett, Biblical Foundations for Baptist Churches (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2005), 135–160.
- Acts 15:1–29; see also Fisher Humphreys, The Way We Were: How Southern Baptists Lost Their Way and Found It Again (Macon, GA: Smyth & Helwys, 2002), 61–75.
Originally written in Chinese.
English translation assisted by ChatGPT.
沒有留言 :
發佈留言