Duesing, Jason G. “The Believers’ Church: A ‘Natural Resource’ Worth Conserving.” A White Paper from the Center for Theological Research (March 2006): 1–5.

Summary

The following review of Jason Duesing’s work, “The Believers Church: A ‘Natural Resource’ Worth Conserving,” summarizes the article’s contents along with a survey of its major strengths and weaknesses. The author’s intent is to persuade the reader that the believers’ church is the “vehicle to protect and deliver the Gospel,” but is a wasted resource in the current environment of “ecclesiological relativism” (1). Duesing presents three primary arguments to support his polemic, and then utilizes the Anabaptists as exemplary protectors of the Gospel.

Duesing begins by comparing the depletion of natural resource in the United States in the early twentieth-century to the current state of the believers’ church. The author then provides three major thematic arguments. First, Duesing argues that the current evangelical environment lacks emphasis on the doctrine of the church, which results in churches that often self-destruct (2). Second, the author argues that a primary cause of the ecclesiological relativism is a “modified ecumenism that relegates doctrines such as the believers’ church to the realm of ‘non-essentials'” (2). Third, Duesing argues that the Anabaptists provide a good example of the type of ecclesiological conservatism necessary to preserve the doctrine of the believers’ church (4).

With respect to the Anabaptist example, the author highlights a brief history of the movement, which includes their resistance to ecclesiological intolerance by the state Church, the opposition to the status quo of infant baptism, and complete separation from the existing institutions to accomplish biblical purity (3-4). The author concludes that Anabaptist history provides a strong backdrop by which modern evangelicals can move away from indifference, and toward a strong doctrine of the believers’ church (5).

Critical Evaluation

The strengths of Duesing’s article are fourfold. First, the author highlights the connection between the gospel message and the ministry of the church (2). Without the gospel, there is no message for the church to proclaim, and without the believers’ church there is no vehicle to proclaim the message. Second, Duesing correctly correlates ecumenism with the risk of a deterioration of the doctrine of the church (2). Specifically, if the unity of believers necessarily requires undermining the biblical purity of the New Testament church, the cost of ecumenism is too high. Third, the author provides a strong illustration of courage in the form of the Anabaptist movement, which often risked lives to hold tightly to an interpretation of the biblical text even when it meant institutional separation (3-5). Finally, it is difficult to overestimate the importance of Duesing’s reminder to believers regarding the future of Christianity: “The preservation and right articulation of the Gospel can only be accomplished through the preservation and right articulation of the church” (5).

The weaknesses of Duesing’s article are threefold. First, the author assumes that indifference to the doctrine of the church is at the root of many Christian difficulties, but he provides little evidence to support the assertion (1). Although significant difficulties do exist in modern Christianity, the difficulties are not defined.[1] Furthermore, it is difficult to imagine that “indifference” to the doctrine of the church is the culprit in a generation that continues to actively wrestle with ecclesiology. From the church growth movement to seeker churches that support mega-church outcomes, and from prosperity gospel television initiatives to the emerging church movement, modern Christians continue to grapple with defining and redefining ἐκκλησία.[2] Second, the author asserts that the current evangelical environment “disregards the biblically-designed vehicle for protecting and carrying out the Gospel” (2). Other than criticizing the current evangelical environment and holding high the courage of the Anabaptists, Duesing provides little explicit guidance regarding how to deploy the necessary “new movement of a different kind of conservationism” (1). Granted, an exploration of Anabaptist history indicates a call to biblical purity and a separation from existing institutions may be in order, but the author refuses to explain exactly what this would entail for modern believers. Finally, Duesing suggests that the current indifference to the doctrine of the church is the result of “modified ecumenism” (2). Although it is not unreasonable to conclude that ecumenism would cause indifference, the author provides no specific evidence proving how ecumenism has created indifference in the modern evangelical environment.

Conclusion

Without question, Protestant denominations face significant difficulties in the twenty-first century. The article’s value in its larger academic context is that it raises the critical issue of defining and deploying a doctrine of the believers’ church that preserves and articulates the gospel. However, the article lacks evidence to support the assertions that the difficulties rest with indifference and ecumenism. Furthermore, the article lacks specific guidance regarding how to modify the doctrine of the church to accomplish the mission of preserving and articulating the gospel for future generations.

Bibliography

Carson, D. A. Becoming Conversant with the Emerging Church: Understanding a Movement and Its Implications. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2005.

Duesing, Jason G. “The Believers’ Church: A “Natural Resource” Worth Conserving.” A White Paper from the Center for Theological Research (March 2006): 1–5.

Earley, Dave, and David Wheeler. Evangelism Is: How to Share Jesus with Passion and Confidence. Nashville, TN: B&H Academic, 2010.

[1] See Dave Earley and David Wheeler, Evangelism Is: How to Share Jesus with Passion and Confidence (Nashville, TN: B&H Academic, 2010), 29. Early and Wheeler explain that from 2000-2010 membership of all Protestants denominations declined by 9.5 percent, while the national population increased.

[2] See D. A. Carson, Becoming Conversant with the Emerging Church: Understanding a Movement and Its Implications (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2005), 9–36.