Here is a more recent assertion of those principles as they relate to current frustrations within the denomination. It appears that we live in interesting times.
From the beginning of the Baptist movement in the 17th century, Baptist men and women have prized freedom both for individual believers and for church communities. While Baptist churches have willingly combined their resources to form denominations, the freedom of the local church to work out its own forms of ministry has remained a hallmark of the Baptist movement. The result of this freedom has been a wide range of theology as well as diverse ministries. We affirm our commitment to such freedom.
We further affirm that Christ is the Lord of the individual and of the church, and both are free to follow where Christ may lead without permission or approval from an ecclesiastical structure.
The Coalition for Baptist Principles calls on all Baptists to reaffirm those principles that have been dear to us as Baptist Christians.
Article I:
the living Christ is the final judge of our belief and actions.The call to faith by Christ is rooted in the repeated call, �Follow me.� We, therefore, reject all attempts to impose a creed or creed-like structure to be used as a litmus test for orthodoxy. We declare that we follow Christ. We do not believe that because a vote has been taken, the will of Christ has been discerned.
Article 2:
the Bible is a dynamic, not a static document, that needs to be interpreted for every age.No one person or group can faithfully interpret the Bible for every age or every other group. We affirm the freedom of the community of faith to read and interpret the Bible under the leadership of the Holy Spirit. We declare that this freedom is central to Baptist life and thought. We reject the attempts of some to impose their interpretation of the Bible onto others. We affirm our need for dialogue and kindness in our differences, but we still stand by our own freedom to read and interpret the Bible, relying on both the historical understanding of the church and on the best methods of modern Biblical study.
Article 3:
the separation of church and state is good both for the church and the state, and it promotes the common good of all citizens.We declare our belief that the historic core of Baptist thought resides in liberty of conscience apart from any coercion by the state. Generations of Baptist forebears have lived and suffered for this conviction, and we affirm the conviction that religious liberty is best served by a separation of church and state. The church does not need the state to prop it up, and we reject any attempts by the church to dictate policy to the state. At the same time, we affirm our responsibility as citizens to have our voice heard and our moral concerns expressed.
Article 4:
non-conformity to majority opinion is part of the Baptist heritage, and to submit Baptist theology to majority vote is to betray the heritage of people called Baptists.From Roger Williams to Martin Luther King, Jr., Baptists have been free to stand for unpopular positions. We reject the efforts of some to force all Baptists into a single position on controversial issues. Baptists have always had diverse theological, political and social positions.
Article 5:
the local church is free to make its own decisions under the Lordship of Christ.A local Baptist church need not ask permission from any judicature to venture out on faith in any ministry of love. A given ministry may not be the ministry of choice for another Baptist church, but to threaten disfellowship due to a church�s choice of ministry is a disservice to the Baptist heritage of local church autonomy. Baptist churches cooperate in associations and regions, not because they all agree, but because there are some things they can do better through pooling their resources.
Article 6:
theological diversity among Baptists is a strength.Theological conformity among Baptists has never been a goal. The diversity of our theological positions has strengthened Baptists throughout the world. In an environment of freedom, Baptists continue to find free inquiry into biblical, social, political, and economic issues of importance a gift from our heritage. Intimidation and exclusion of dissenters are outside the boundaries of the Baptist spirit.
I am so not Baptist!
It's not that I so much disagree as find it odd that a group of Christians would seek to identify themselves along these lines. But it might be myself who is the odd one, since I am also, a somewhat atypical Covenanter.
Well maybe I do disagree on second thought.
Frankly its that emphasis on autonomy that I just don't get. I don't see autonomy taught in the Scriptures, rather I see inter-dependence and mutual submision. Freedom yes, autonomy no. But then perhaps I am spliting hairs.
I'm afraid that I agree with my fellow Covenanter, Larry. The scriptures are very clear about how Christians are supposed to define and identify themselves - starting with 1 John 4:6.
Obviously, anyone who dosen't listen to the Covenant is "not from God". It says so in the Bible! ;-)
Posted by: Karl at January 6, 2005 01:01 PMI must ask my fellow Covenater Karl, Where is it written that "anyone who dosen't list to the Cvoenat is 'not from God'"? A true Covenater would know simply saying "It says so in the Bible" doesn't suffice. Chapter and Verse brother! ;-] I am so embaraced. ;-)
(Sorry a little inside joke,but I couldn't resist.)
You covenant people...so silly. ;-)
It is important to recall that the Baptists were/are reacting to a specific political context. England in the 16th and 17th Century was One Big Litmus Test. We still carry that baggage.
I'll get the dates if you want them, but the first two London Confessions were about achieving orthodoxy in England between Baptists and the Church of England. Parliament had to approve them, and they did.
I'll dig some stuff up for you.
Personally, I think this document is pretty cool. It is what affords me the opportunity to do ecumenical work. In fact:
Article 6:
theological diversity among Baptists is a strength.
Theological conformity among Baptists has never been a goal. The diversity of our theological positions has strengthened Baptists throughout the world. In an environment of freedom, Baptists continue to find free inquiry into biblical, social, political, and economic issues of importance a gift from our heritage. Intimidation and exclusion of dissenters are outside the boundaries of the Baptist spirit.This article says it all. Welcome to how Baptists think about The Church!
Enjoy.
Posted by: AngloBaptist at January 6, 2005 02:22 PMTripp,
I get it intelectualy, I think I have a decent grasp of why you say what you say, and given the history I would agree that theological diversity is the Baptist strength, etc.
It's just from my POV it seems that Baptists are kind of stuck in the early Enlightenment, and a very particular point in the history of the Western Church. I don't have any suggestions nor is it really an attempt to convince Baptists to be otherwise, its just that I don't identify as a Christian in these ways. As a Covenanter I value Freedom in Christ, but, at this point in time, I see the value of mutual submission in Christ as a higher value than freedom and diversity. Not that I would argue for absolute conformity either, don't get me wrong.
Larry,
I'm a little concerned that you've placed "mutual submission in Christ" over and against "freedom and diversity" - as if Christ was somehow interested in making us less Free and less Diverse. Maybe it's because in our culture we have a lot of "baggage" about what people have allowed in the name of freedom, etc?
And if one is truly stuck in the early enlightenment, why is that better or worse than being stuck in the 5th century? or the 10th .B.C? or the 21st .A.D?
Sorry to stir up the pot here, but in this regard, I find myself bending more towards Baptist ecclisiology than the traditional peitistic model that we've embraced.
Posted by: Karl at January 6, 2005 04:05 PMKarl,
Not over and against. I don't believe they are opposed. If things work as they should they would not be opposed.
It's just that when I read these Baptist identity statements it seems they lift freedom and diversity above mutual submission.
It's tricky ballance, and I may be misreading the Baptist here.
No I don't think you should be stuck in any particular period, I personaly would recomend trying to hear the whole counsel of the Church through its entire history, one of the reasons I find mutual submission so important. Mutual submission means listening to and critiqueing and maybe even being formed by what is unfamiliar, especially if it has been said consistently. Not full proof, why I do see the Baptist point to a certain extent.
And yes in recent years I have returned to the more traditional Pietist Heritage of the Covenant, Spener et al. Especially after my time at North Park Seminary.
Though I'd like to know your understanding of pietism. Though this is probably not a conversation topic for Tripps blog. If you follow my link you should be able to e-mail me if you want.
Tripp, when was The Judson Declaration made?
Posted by: Megan at January 7, 2005 10:45 AMMegan, this past October. So, it is pretty recent.
Posted by: AngloBaptist at January 7, 2005 01:59 PMLarry -
We may indeed be stuck. That is an interesting perspective. We have an institutional memory. The thing that is interesting is that our tradition has always struggled with s dogmatism vs freedom dialectic. Once upon a time, the 18th Century in PA for example, excommunication was frequent. The unrepentant sinner was simply asked to leave. This was usually over issues like adultery, stinginess (give your money to the poor or get out), divorce or some such thing. What makes this interesting is that given the autonomy of the congregation, the offending party would simply find another church. Makes sense? No? Well, when the Pennsylvania Baptists figured this out, the actually passed a rule that once you were excommunicant from one Baptist church in the Convention, you were excommunicant from all! Wow!!! How's that for autonomy of the congregation? Heh. I could find out how the voting went if you are interested.
Anyway, this stance did not last long because of the opinions at the other end of the spectrum. So, litmus test/dogma vs freedom is our struggle. We hold tightly to it.
Fun stuff.
Posted by: AngloBaptist at January 7, 2005 02:06 PM