|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: New Leader for British Baptists
|
MrsM
Apprentice
# 14940
|
Posted
The Baptist Union of Great Britain elected it's new General Secretary this weekend at their Baptist Assembly in Blackpool.
It was an historic moment as this role (if there were a Baptist equivalent to archbishop of Canterbury this would be it) is filled by a female minister for the first time, Revd Lynn Green.
I'm excited as it's a reminder that in this movement every role is available to both men and women, but I wondered what other Baptists thought of the appointment?
You can read more here: The Baptist Times
Posts: 14 | From: the dining room, normally | Registered: Jul 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I no longer worship in a Baptist church but I have a lot of time for BUGB Baptists. I don't know anything about Lynne Green other than what I've just read on the link - but the fact that it seems pretty much unanimous is, in Baptist terms, a pretty good sign.
Well done them!
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
I don't know Lynn at all. We did have a female Deputy General Secretary some years ago, Myra Blyth for whom I had (and have) the greatest respect. We have also had female Presidents, and the first lady minister was ordained back in the 1920s!
I am pretty sure there is a remit out there which is aiming to get some sexual equality within the denomination's leadership. The URC though is streets ahead on this.
[ 07. May 2013, 18:21: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stejjie
Shipmate
# 13941
|
Posted
I was there for the vote and it did feel like a special, historic moment. The unanimity (one or two abstentions aside) did make it feel like the Spirit was leading us in this (if you think God speaks through processes like this- I do) and the committee that chose her were equally unanimous that this was so.
I think what made it even more remarkable in every respect is that Lynne is taking this on at the same time as fostering 2 young children (she already has 2 older children). BUGB are making arrangements to ensure she can take on the General Secretary's role while looking after her children (working from home etc.). I'm sure it shouldn't feel remarkable for those reasons - but it does. Hopefully the day will come when appointments like this aren't remarkable.
A very good day for BUGB (felt like a good Assembly overall).
--------------------
A not particularly-alt-worshippy, fairly mainstream, mildly evangelical, vaguely post-modern-ish Baptist
Posts: 1117 | From: Urmston, Manchester, UK | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Percy B
Shipmate
# 17238
|
Posted
I know very little about the Baptist Union. Is it middle ground baptist? I have heard extremes on either end - evangelical and liberal hard liners do not belong.
Is the new leader central?
--------------------
Mary, a priest??
Posts: 582 | From: Nudrug | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
SA - women ministers since the late 1870s
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Stejjie:
I was there for the vote and it did feel like a special, historic moment. The unanimity (one or two abstentions aside) did make it feel like the Spirit was leading us in this (if you think God speaks through processes like this- I do) and the committee that chose her were equally unanimous that this was so.
I think what made it even more remarkable in every respect is that Lynne is taking this on at the same time as fostering 2 young children (she already has 2 older children). BUGB are making arrangements to ensure she can take on the General Secretary's role while looking after her children (working from home etc.). I'm sure it shouldn't feel remarkable for those reasons - but it does. Hopefully the day will come when appointments like this aren't remarkable.
This looks like a step towards accepting that leaders can retain a home life. A work/life balance isn't recognised in some churches and a poor one makes for difficulties in others.
I hope God gives Rev Lynn Green the strength to do all her work in the church and elsewhere.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Percy B:
I know very little about the Baptist Union. Is it middle ground baptist? I have heard extremes on either end - evangelical and liberal hard liners do not belong.
We're fairly liberal and don't always feel part of the "in crowd", however we are by no means unique! It is a fairly broad group - unlike some others in the UK.
[ 07. May 2013, 22:33: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
It's a safe, establishment choice. She ticks all the right boxes for the denomination: we need a prophet, a firebrand not a safe pair of hands. Not what we needed IMHO, someone way more radical being required to shake things up.
I've met her - some 15 years ago though. I wasn't over impressed then nor, to be honest, were the women in our group. It was a talk on feminist theology.
I suspect that for some - and not just the anti woman camp - the jury is out. A lot will depend on how she handles some of the issues facing the BUGB which will hit the fan very soon thanks to a bit of ostrich style burying our heads in the sand over the past 15 or so years.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I think the Primitive Methodists got there before the SA did, Mudfrog ...
But then, they're not still 'going' but were absorbed back into the parent body.
Let's not start with Joanna Southcote and so on though, shall we? ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif) ![[Biased]](wink.gif) ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Still, let's hope the new appointment works out well for the BUGB. It's always difficult to know what a President can actually achieve in a highly devolved and congregationally-governed set-up ... but then, the same could be said of the Archbishop of Canterbury ...
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mark Betts
Ship's Navigation Light
# 17074
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
It's a safe, establishment choice. She ticks all the right boxes for the denomination: we need a prophet, a firebrand not a safe pair of hands. Not what we needed IMHO, someone way more radical being required to shake things up.
Radical in what way?
quote:
I've met her - some 15 years ago though. I wasn't over impressed then nor, to be honest, were the women in our group. It was a talk on feminist theology...
Feminist theology is radical IMO.
--------------------
"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary."
Posts: 2080 | From: Leicester | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Percy B
Shipmate
# 17238
|
Posted
It depends what was said on 'Feminist Theology' surely!
I think the comment about mother / children is a good one but also one men need to hear - many male church leaders have families and sometimes their families suffer because of the demand s the church puts on them. Sometimes that seems OK for men but not for women. That is to say - men sometimes boast about being too busy and getting in late at home. Mothers who said similar things are often frowned upon.
I'm interested to know what issues the Baptist Union in Britain has to face soon. Is it leading the way in addressing thorny issues or behind the times?
--------------------
Mary, a priest??
Posts: 582 | From: Nudrug | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stejjie
Shipmate
# 13941
|
Posted
I do think there's a danger of a tokenistic acceptance: "Oh she's a woman, we've never had a woman general secretary before, so she must be good!" That's unhelpful IMHO and may well lead to us burying our heads in the sand and assuming we're on the right path just because of this decision, when there's many more difficult issues for us as Baptists to grapple with. Also, this decision, however radical or not it may be, can only be one part of the bigger picture of change that needs to happen within BUGB over the years that Exclamation Mark points out.
That said, I think her appointment is significant and does mark something of a break with the past. It may not be all the way there, but I do see it as a step in the right direction - both in terms of appointing a woman to a traditionally all-male role and also in terms of recognising and shaping the role around her work-life needs, which is something that's dear to my own heart!
The problem with appointing a "prophet and a firebrand" to "shake things up", ISTM, is that while they['re going around being prophetic and firebrand-y and shaking things up, they're also alienating, hurting, upsetting and driving out a whole load of people. And that isn't a Christ-like way of leading, any more than just allowing bad ways of living to simply carry on is Christ-like. Changing a big organisation like BUGB is always going to be a huge task, remembering that it involves not just changing the official structures, but the churches that are BUGB and that treasure their Baptist autonomy and, I suspect, can only be done step-by-step. Also, having followed the debates that went on prior to last year's Assembly, there's as many different ideas of what needs to change as there are people who say there needs to be change. Managing all of that is a nigh-on impossible task.
Yes, it requires someone who can see the problems and who, through prayer and reflection, has an idea of what needs to happen to address that. But it also needs someone who has a deep pastoral heart for those who will be affected by the changes: which, when it comes down to it, will ultimately be the ordinary members of Baptist churches. They need to be loved and cared for and, as much as possible, brought along through the process of change - change that they may find difficult to cope with as it involves changing things that are very dear to them.
Simply rushing in and saying loudly "This is the way God's calling us to change and if you don't like it you're free to leave" isn't going to bring about that change and isn't, IMHO, a Christ-like way of leading. Lynne Green somehow needs to find that will not to bury her head in the sand and not simply to be a safe pair of hands, but also to bring the whole of the Union (or as much as possible of it) with her. That's going to be a mighty difficult act: she needs our prayers and support in doing so, ISTM.
--------------------
A not particularly-alt-worshippy, fairly mainstream, mildly evangelical, vaguely post-modern-ish Baptist
Posts: 1117 | From: Urmston, Manchester, UK | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tubbs
Miss Congeniality
# 440
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Percy B:
...
I'm interested to know what issues the Baptist Union in Britain has to face soon. Is it leading the way in addressing thorny issues or behind the times?
The issues that the Baptists have are pretty standard – aging congregations in some areas and multigenerational ones in others; growing in some places and declining in others; large hole in the finances that needs to be filled etc etc.
The Baptist model of governance – congregations decide most things and self fund – with support from the BUGB mean that over the next few years there’s going to be some very difficult conversations about resources, funding and ministry – particularly for the small to mid-sized churches. I could be blunter … but as that’s probably not helpful, I won’t.
She's got a hard job and I wish her lots of luck. She's going to need it!
Tubbs
--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am
Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mark Betts
Ship's Navigation Light
# 17074
|
Posted
With the greatest of respect, if the Baptist model of governance is largely autonomous, where local churches decide things themselves and fund themselves, what actually is the General Secretary's job?
--------------------
"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary."
Posts: 2080 | From: Leicester | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Stejjie:
I do think there's a danger of a tokenistic acceptance: "Oh she's a woman, we've never had a woman general secretary before, so she must be good!" That's unhelpful IMHO and may well lead to us burying our heads in the sand and assuming we're on the right path just because of this decision, when there's many more difficult issues for us as Baptists to grapple with. Also, this decision, however radical or not it may be, can only be one part of the bigger picture of change that needs to happen within BUGB over the years that Exclamation Mark points out.
That said, I think her appointment is significant and does mark something of a break with the past. It may not be all the way there, but I do see it as a step in the right direction - both in terms of appointing a woman to a traditionally all-male role and also in terms of recognising and shaping the role around her work-life needs, which is something that's dear to my own heart!
The problem with appointing a "prophet and a firebrand" to "shake things up", ISTM, is that while they['re going around being prophetic and firebrand-y and shaking things up, they're also alienating, hurting, upsetting and driving out a whole load of people. And that isn't a Christ-like way of leading, any more than just allowing bad ways of living to simply carry on is Christ-like. Changing a big organisation like BUGB is always going to be a huge task, remembering that it involves not just changing the official structures, but the churches that are BUGB and that treasure their Baptist autonomy and, I suspect, can only be done step-by-step. Also, having followed the debates that went on prior to last year's Assembly, there's as many different ideas of what needs to change as there are people who say there needs to be change. Managing all of that is a nigh-on impossible task.
Yes, it requires someone who can see the problems and who, through prayer and reflection, has an idea of what needs to happen to address that. But it also needs someone who has a deep pastoral heart for those who will be affected by the changes: which, when it comes down to it, will ultimately be the ordinary members of Baptist churches. They need to be loved and cared for and, as much as possible, brought along through the process of change - change that they may find difficult to cope with as it involves changing things that are very dear to them.
Simply rushing in and saying loudly "This is the way God's calling us to change and if you don't like it you're free to leave" isn't going to bring about that change and isn't, IMHO, a Christ-like way of leading. Lynne Green somehow needs to find that will not to bury her head in the sand and not simply to be a safe pair of hands, but also to bring the whole of the Union (or as much as possible of it) with her. That's going to be a mighty difficult act: she needs our prayers and support in doing so, ISTM.
Thats great but how can it happen when the Gen Sec role has such a huge element of admin built into it? The job description looks like one half will sap the energy from the other -- if you want a startegic thinker let them get on with it. Don't saddle them with admin
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
As for the commenst about the prophetic element - well yes it can work out like that but it doesn't have to. Anyway why shouldn't there be a moving and a shaking if we aren't on track with god and that's what it needs to get us back?
"Radical dissent" is often held up as one of the BUGB key values. All too often we see radical as simply swimming against the tide (which it is) but forget other meaning which is related to being rooted.
Even our radical dissent is anything but - how on earth did were we not called to cry out against welfare reform but simply began to whinge when it became a done deal?
Rearrange these words into a well know sentence. After, Closed. Horse. Bolted. Door.
Forgive me - I'm preaching from Amos and he does rather give you a jaundiced view of skin deep religious observance.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
It's always difficult to know what a President can actually achieve in a highly devolved and congregationally-governed set-up ... but then, the same could be said of the Archbishop of Canterbury ...
Minor correction: she's not the President (one-year honorary appointment, much like the Moderator in the Church of Scotland) but the General Secretary (a substantive long-term post).
But your point still stands ...
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stejjie
Shipmate
# 13941
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Betts:
With the greatest of respect, if the Baptist model of governance is largely autonomous, where local churches decide things themselves and fund themselves, what actually is the General Secretary's job?
It's a reasonable question, don't see any disrespect in it.
The point is that although Baptist local churches are autonomous (as in they claim the right and competence to seek the mind of Christ for themselves without having to "refer upwards" to a larger ecclesial body or figure) they're not independent (as in simply being little islands of Baptist-ness with nothing to do with each other). There's a phrase that gets used a lot in Baptist circles (at least in BUGB), "walking together and watching over each other" that's as true of the relationship between Baptist churches as their members: they voluntarily seek to relate to each other, to support each other and draw support from each other, to encourage each other and listen to God together.
BUGB (which only covers England and Wales - and not all of Wales either, I don't think) exists as an organisation where that happens to a greater or lesser extent. Baptist churches don't have to be part of BUGB to call themselves "Baptist", but it exists as a way of ensuring that this life together happens.
So the General Secretary is the person with overall responsibility for making that happen. I was going to try and give examples of what it involves, but here's a list of the main responsibilities from BUGB's website.
(BTW I wouldn't take this as "gospel" and I'm sure some of the other Baptists here will be swift to correct any errors and omissions!)
--------------------
A not particularly-alt-worshippy, fairly mainstream, mildly evangelical, vaguely post-modern-ish Baptist
Posts: 1117 | From: Urmston, Manchester, UK | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Stejjie:
The point is that although Baptist local churches are autonomous (as in they claim the right and competence to seek the mind of Christ for themselves without having to "refer upwards" to a larger ecclesial body or figure) they're not independent (as in simply being little islands of Baptist-ness with nothing to do with each other).
That's the ideal - in practice some churches can be very independent-minded indeed.
quote:
BUGB (which only covers England and Wales - and not all of Wales either).
It doesn't cover Welsh-speaking Welsh churches, they have their own Union. Some of the English-speaking ones may have dual membership. There were also a few Scottish churches in BUGB for historical reasons but I don't think there are now.
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
As for the comment about the prophetic element - well yes it can work out like that but it doesn't have to. Anyway why shouldn't there be a moving and a shaking if we aren't on track with god and that's what it needs to get us back?
"Radical dissent" is often held up as one of the BUGB key values. All too often we see radical as simply swimming against the tide (which it is) but forget other meaning which is related to being rooted.
Even our radical dissent is anything but - how on earth did were we not called to cry out against welfare reform but simply began to whinge when it became a done deal?
Rearrange these words into a well know sentence. After, Closed. Horse. Bolted. Door.
Forgive me - I'm preaching from Amos and he does rather give you a jaundiced view of skin deep religious observance.
What is 'radical', 'dissenting', or for that matter 'prophetic' about disagreeing publicly with welfare reform? Lots of people are saying similar things. Besides, how many members of the Cabinet would be listening and how many of them are members of congregations within the BUGB?
Returning to a question others have asked.
1. Is it the General Secretary's job to be radical, dissenting and a prophet?
2. If it is, in what context, towards the rest of the world or towards the complacencies and assumptions of members of the BUGB, should they exhibit such?
3. Prophecy isn't just being outspoken or controversial. It's knowing the mind of God and imparting it. It's also a special and unusual calling. Why should you expect God to call the same person to be a prophet as he has called to be General Secretary? That sounds more like a co-ordinating job.
4. It's not enough to imply you know what you think she should be saying. If you are that sure you know, isn't it your duty to say, clearly and persuasively, in season and out of season?
5. If you really believe you know what God is saying to your ecclesial community, might not that mean it's your job to be saying it, rather than hoping someone else will?
6. What's Amos got to do with it? Anybody can preach a fiery sermon on Amos, but people usually get him wrong.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Stejjie:
There's a phrase that gets used a lot in Baptist circles (at least in BUGB), "walking together and watching over each other" that's as true of the relationship between Baptist churches as their members: they voluntarily seek to relate to each other, to support each other and draw support from each other, to encourage each other and listen to God together.
This is awesome! As and when I need to find a new church I am so going to investigate the local Baptist church, if there is one.
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
It's not really for me to say, but I think if you ever needed them, you'd get on well with the Baptists, South Coast Kevin, although you'll find the individual churches differ a fair bit - as is only natural.
The charismatic end of Baptistdom tends to segue quite neatly into either New Frontiers or the Vineyard, although I would suggest that there are elements within the Baptist way of doing things that avoid what I'd see as the excesses of each of those ... which isn't to say I don't have a lot of time for individuals in those set-ups.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Stejjie
Shipmate
# 13941
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
quote:
Originally posted by Stejjie:
There's a phrase that gets used a lot in Baptist circles (at least in BUGB), "walking together and watching over each other" that's as true of the relationship between Baptist churches as their members: they voluntarily seek to relate to each other, to support each other and draw support from each other, to encourage each other and listen to God together.
This is awesome! As and when I need to find a new church I am so going to investigate the local Baptist church, if there is one.
It is awesome - although I'd echo Baptist Trainfan's caveat that how much this is adhered to varies from church to church (as with most things); some are very committed to this and see themselves as very much part of the Union, others see themselves as much more independent. But the idea behind it, that despite the autonomy we claim Baptist churches seek to relate to each other not because we're made to but because we choose to, is something that makes me glad to be a Baptist (I say that without wishing to do down any other denomination/church, I hasten to add!)
--------------------
A not particularly-alt-worshippy, fairly mainstream, mildly evangelical, vaguely post-modern-ish Baptist
Posts: 1117 | From: Urmston, Manchester, UK | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Without trying to undermine what Steijje (sp?) has written, I'd offer the observation that many Baptist ministers seem to get on better with their local URC, Methodist or Anglican counterparts than they do with other Baptist ministers in their own town or city.
I know that's a generalisation, but some do consciously favour local ecumenical links in preference to co-operation with someone on the far side of town who just happens to belong to the same denomination or network.
That said, it's interesting to hear that the 'cluster' system seems to be bearing fruit. I used to joke that it sounded like haemorrhoids and could well end up giving some ministers a pain in the arse ...
I'm probably a bit too 'high' these days for the Baptists but I like their way of doing things ... some kind of radical/liturgical/sacramental fusion would suit me ... when it works it can indeed be 'awesome' in the true sense of the word rather than in the rather hackeyed way it's used among da yoof ...
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
It's not really for me to say, but I think if you ever needed them, you'd get on well with the Baptists, South Coast Kevin, although you'll find the individual churches differ a fair bit - as is only natural.
Thanks for this, Gamaliel. Point taken regarding Baptist churches not all being the same, but I very much like what I know of the ethos of the movement as whole.
Baptist Trainfan and Stejjie - the principle of 'interdependence', as explained in that Baptist Times article, is where it's at IMO. Churches should be autonomous rather than part of a massive institution, but that absolutely shouldn't mean a free-wheeling independence.
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I'd offer the observation that many Baptist ministers seem to get on better with their local URC, Methodist or Anglican counterparts than they do with other Baptist ministers in their own town or city.
I know that's a generalisation, but some do consciously favour local ecumenical links in preference to co-operation with someone on the far side of town who just happens to belong to the same denomination or network.
It's also a matter of theology: some of my Baptist colleagues think I am decidedly "iffy" while some of my Anglican friends don't! Clearly - as you have hinted - geography and social demographics also have a part to play.
There is also a church size factor. Big churches often see themselves as self-sufficient (and their ministers spend all their time running them). Small churches may only have a Lay Pastor and may feel a bit intimidated by the "big boys". IME the medium sized churches are most likely to mix and work together. Probably true in other denominations, too.
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
[QUOTE]
1. It's also a matter of theology: some of my Baptist colleagues think I am decidedly "iffy" while some of my Anglican friends don't! Clearly - as you have hinted - geography and social demographics also have a part to play.
2. There is also a church size factor. Big churches often see themselves as self-sufficient (and their ministers spend all their time running them). Small churches may only have a Lay Pastor and may feel a bit intimidated by the "big boys". IME the medium sized churches are most likely to mix and work together. Probably true in other denominations, too.
1. I think I know the feeling, but perhaps from a different set of perspectives! I certainly relate to other ministers from other denominations.
2. True - but sometimes small isn't all that beautiful. I remember some years back when small churches brought a small mindset to one (very old) association. But, I tke your point about the larger churches - they pretty much operate on their own and you never, for example, see the vacancies for "certain" large churches advertised. They are filled through their own ways and means (saw some of it myself a while back when I was "approached").
Then, there are those churches which are naturally at arms length from the BUGB. I'm in one now and was in one for 11 years. In the latter case it resulted from a poor decision at Regional level when they were seeking a way forward - that and the fact that the congregation was not made up of life long baptists. I guess the latter point is a factor in many bugb churches becoming less involved: people aren't that taken by denominationalism these days, even if they are taken by the baptist church. Of all major uk denominations BUGB churches probably have the widest mix of people from the POV of their denominational and other origins.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
Sometimes small isn't all that beautiful. I remember some years back when small churches brought a small mindset to one (very old) association.
Absolutely true, they can be inward-looking and defeatist in outlook. Although their situation is not helped by some (not all) larger churches implying that their "smallness" equates to "failure" while they themselves clearly "have God's blessing on them". This ignores so much about the demographics of an area, social context, etc.
quote:
People aren't that taken by denominationalism these days, even if they are taken by the baptist church. Of all major uk denominations BUGB churches probably have the widest mix of people from the POV of their denominational and other origins.
True. We see here on the Ship that there are people who are convinced High Church Anglicans or Orthodox and have a very high "brand loyalty" to their ecclesiology and/or liturgy. I don't think many people are in Baptist churches specifically for similar reasons!
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
ExclamationMark, you've answered Baptist Trainfan. Any prospect of answers to the questions I asked three days ago?
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
ExclamationMark, you've answered Baptist Trainfan. Any prospect of answers to the questions I asked three days ago?
Apologies - an oversight on my part.
1 & 2. Yes if possible - it's a public post and speaks to others not just the BUGB. The Gen Sec will meet (on behalf of the BUGB) leaders form churches and the wider world. It is an opportunity to bring a Christ like response to these (not simply a "baptist" one).
It's my opinion and my view, of course, and may not coincide with the view(s) of anyone else.
3. I agree with your definition here, Enoch. At different times the BUGB (as with all church groups) need different skills - and my own view is that we need a moving and a shaking now at national level to throw off the complacency of a few decades standing and galvanise the local church with appropriate distributed resources to do the work of the Kingdom.
4 & 5. I've said this publicly and consistently through the consultation process which has recently concluded. I have been saying this within the church fellowship I know as home.
6. I agree Amos is misunderstood, yes. He may not have been a shepherd but as someone who looked after sheep, a farmer.
He prophesised from the heart of the nation, geographically (just a few miles from Jerusalam and Bethelem) and spiritually (close to the known centres of worship both of YHWH and also idols). He was neither a man of the court (Jeremiah) nor a man of the temple (Isaiah). He was an ordinary man with an extraordinary message that challenged assumptions and practices of the denomination of his day.
I wasn't preaching Amos as a deliberate choice to speak into these circumstances - it's on our preaching plan put together back in February. It just struck me that there were some relevant warnings here about the church as a whole, not least BUGB. We've been pretty happy about how we have managed to keep our numbers going in the recent decline in attendance and we must be careful we don't get too smug about it lest we develop an idea that thinks we're doing it better than most. It's just, well, different.
Hope that clarifies a few things.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
Very many thanks. I appreciate your kind response.
What do you think the BUGB and its members should be doing, that's really different from what they're doing now, or is this something you feel you should only be saying within your own ecclesial household?
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Very many thanks. I appreciate your kind response.
What do you think the BUGB and its members should be doing, that's really different from what they're doing now, or is this something you feel you should only be saying within your own ecclesial household?
Thanks.
My own perspective on the BUGB is this. To explain the solution, we've got to rflect on where we are and how we got there. the solution has national, local but above all personal implications.
1. There is real pressure on resources esp financial ones.
2. Our ecclesiology means that we can be as independant or not as we wish on a church by church basis.
3. We began our recent review from a position of relative strength - stable numbers and lots of fresh expressions of church going on. But there is an underlying current of financial challenge (fall in giving to support the denomination) and govermental tension (unwieldy structures).
4. We were also becoming increasingly centrist or centralised - functions once local, had a certain "Head Office" focus about them. (Staff at Didcot even used to refer to their offices Baptist House as "The House." We also had an unwieldy and costly set up of Regions and their associated admin functions.
5. The BUGB had put the lid on certain essential debates for a number of years yet below the surface operating on a don't ask: don't tell basis on the ground. This blew open with Steve Chalke's articles and the realisation that the ministry of BUGB could do nothing about it even if they wanted to (they didn't and don't). They'd far rather such things went away than address them: recently they agreed to talk about it in November!
6. The BUGB has become quite complacent and we still see things we did 15 years ago. To a certain extent BUGB is run today by the same "types" who have always ran it. Posh boys, establishment figures, most of whom have been in ministry almost all their lives and who come from families who have history in the denomination. The world isn't like that. We have begun to lose sight of our radical dissent - not just in challenging the culture we live in but in danger of drifting from our radical - that is, the root of our faith and being. Many of our churches lack diversity from a racial and social POV - who from the local social housing will fit into some of our churches?
7. The solution? A radical reaapraissal of what we are for and a coomitment to expanding our Kingdom work through the local church.
8. A commitment to support churches who are seeking to work with their local communities by reducing costs, streamlining management and process, putting more cash to be used for local churches working in local circumstances with local issues. FYI Enoch, there's a few projects kicking off in Bristol (if that's where you coem from).
9. Using what national voice we have (as well as our local influence) to speak out against monetary policy which exacerbates rather than diminishes equality. Sadly like all denominations we are shouting about welfare reform now but made very little noise in the pre decision consultation phase.
10. Join with other local churches and resolve to take a stand locally - elect councillors, serve as Governors, write letters - if necessary protest publicly.
11. be a gospel driven people - embrave values before we start doing things. Be brave, bold, dangerous: don't accept the status quo even in our own denomination; be risky; love and give all we can.
That covers a bit of it but I'm happy to tell you more if you'd care to PM me.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
But there is an underlying current of financial challenge (fall in giving to support the denomination) and govermental tension (unwieldy structures).
Also post-denominationalism: people will support their own local church but not the BU. I think this lack of "brand loyalty" is more pronounced in Baptist churches than among (say) Roman Catholics. And it will only increase.
quote:
We were also becoming increasingly centrist or centralised - functions once local, had a certain "Head Office" focus about them. (Staff at Didcot even used to refer to their offices Baptist House as "The House." We also had an unwieldy and costly set up of Regions and their associated admin functions.
Yet local churches have increasingly been asking what "they" in Baptist House etc. do for them.
quote:
To a certain extent BUGB is run today by the same "types" who have always ran it. Posh boys, establishment figures, most of whom have been in ministry almost all their lives and who come from families who have history in the denomination. The world isn't like that.
Yes it is - just think of organisations which beget "establishment figures" to run them; there are also political, business and even football dynasties!
quote:
We have begun to lose sight of our radical dissent - not just in challenging the culture we live in but in danger of drifting from our radical - that is, the root of our faith and being. Many of our churches lack diversity from a racial and social POV - who from the local social housing will fit into some of our churches?
Agreed yet difficult to counteract once a movement loses its initial impetus and moves onto further generations. I'm sure this is true of the New Church movement too.
quote:
A commitment to support churches who are seeking to work with their local communities by reducing costs, streamlining management and process, putting more cash to be used for local churches working in local circumstances with local issues ... Using what national voice we have (as well as our local influence) to speak out against monetary policy which exacerbates rather than diminishes equality ... Join with other local churches and resolve to take a stand locally - elect councillors, serve as Governors, write letters - if necessary protest publicly.
Amen and Amen!
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Polly
Shipmate
# 1107
|
Posted
@ Baptist Trainfan & ExclamationMark
I think a lot of what you pinpoint and discuss are more the effects that we are feeling as a movement/denomination/church family rather than the 'causes'.
One of the strongest aspects of the BU is the fact we are a union of churches however I also think this is one of our greatest weaknesses.
Too many Baptists prize their autonomy over anything else especially when it comes to the bigger picture of Baptists being a voice in the nation.
We want to have a voice that speaks up but the moment it says something that we don't disagree with we complain.
I think what we really lack is a vision. If we had a vision that unified what we as Baptists identify with then the BUGB could then redefine their role as Apostolic and could then work with all Baptist churches in promoting and encouraging this.
But at the moment this will not work and we will continue to face the challenges we face because we prize our autonomy more then anything else.
Posts: 560 | From: St Albans | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Polly:
Too many Baptists prize their autonomy over anything else especially when it comes to the bigger picture of Baptists being a voice in the nation.
Are Baptists itching to become 'a voice in the nation'? Why? Isn't that what the CofE's for?
Coming from the Methodist context with its circuit system, I'd suggest that the Baptists take care not to loose too much of their congregational autonomy. Interconnectivity has its virtues, but it doesn't automatically lead to a strong public voice. Can you remember the last public statement made by a President of the Methodist Conference?? Even Methodists don't tend to pay much attention, unless they have a particular interest in what happens higher up the hierarchy.
Also, what's the point of having a single public 'voice' if you can already predict that considerable numbers of your members are likely to disagree with what's being said? The CofE can get away with this kind of confusion - and it can even get away with its disagreements occurring in public - because it's the state church, but I'm not sure how it would benefit other groups.
As an outsider, I think the Baptist Church has largely retreated from public consciousness, but this has been the fate of most Nonconformist churches. It's not a uniquely Baptist problem.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Polly:
@ Baptist Trainfan & ExclamationMark
I think a lot of what you pinpoint and discuss are more the effects that we are feeling as a movement/denomination/church family rather than the 'causes'.
One of the strongest aspects of the BU is the fact we are a union of churches however I also think this is one of our greatest weaknesses.
Too many Baptists prize their autonomy over anything else especially when it comes to the bigger picture of Baptists being a voice in the nation.
We want to have a voice that speaks up but the moment it says something that we don't disagree with we complain.
I think what we really lack is a vision. If we had a vision that unified what we as Baptists identify with then the BUGB could then redefine their role as Apostolic and could then work with all Baptist churches in promoting and encouraging this.
But at the moment this will not work and we will continue to face the challenges we face because we prize our autonomy more then anything else.
Thanks - that's thought provoking. The problem is though is that we'll never have a coherent vision acceptable for all for the very reasons you mention: the tension between autonomy and interaction. There are "issues" over which bapists won't find agreement - e.g allowing SSB's in BUGB churches - that will lead to greater fragmentation not less. There are many on both sides who are frustrated with the BUGB's approach in not having the debate years ago (and now delaying it further) such that whatever decision is made on this (and other) issues, there will be a wider gaps between the churches.
You speak of a national vision but isn't this the kind of thing that, as baptists we naturally don't agree with? Historically, this is not something that the associations would ever consider (let alone the churches) - those of us with a long view of the BUGB can remember when it wasn't so baptist house centric.
We can't rule out the decline of denominationalism as some of the cause of our current situation. Perhaps the BUGB is more susceptible to this than most, given our congregations are often pretty broad mixes from diverse backgrounds who have come to BUGB partly because they are sick and tired and being told what to do by a remote hierarchy. They value local autonomy and whilst they may be interested in what BUGB is doing, they are more concerned with relating to local churches in the work of the Kingom than they are in supporting churches 40 miles away. I'd suggest that we no longer relate to others in a wider sphere because they are baptists but relate to pothers who we se, support and work alongside on a regular basis.
A greater hegemony worked when baptists were a backs to the wall group of churches. Now we're not: lots of other churches baptise by immersion, hold church meetings, call their own ministers, encourage body ministry, speak out against the ills of society. We're arrogant if we pretend we're the only ones - to a certain extent we have a unqiue expression of the combination of all these things but its hardly the only way of being church.
The other problem too is that historically what Baptist House say and what they do, aren't always consistent with one another. It seems to depend on your region sometimes or even what contacts you have.
Finally IMHO the real reason for our malaise is that we have forsaken our roots of radical dissent. BUGB is safe and middle class and I'm sure it's seen by many as an arm of the CofE: just a slightly different version as such.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
We can't rule out the decline of denominationalism as some of the cause of our current situation... I'd suggest that we no longer relate to others in a wider sphere because they are baptists but relate to others who we see, support and work alongside on a regular basis.
I'm not a Baptist so excuse my butting in, however I reckon the above might be a really positive trend (for Baptist churches, if not for the BUGB). It reflects what we see in the New Testament, with references to 'the church in Ephesus', 'the church in Corinth' and so on. The church was seen, in some significant sense, as a city-wide (maybe city-region-wide) body.
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
I think the Baptist Church has largely retreated from public consciousness, but this has been the fate of most Nonconformist churches. It's not a uniquely Baptist problem.
This is why the Baptists, Methodists and URC formed the Joint Public Issues Team - which recently made headline news with its stance on poverty and attitudes to it. It has also some good work on the ethics of Drones but that has not attracted the same attention.
Have you noticed, by the way, that Nonconformist ministers never feature in TV dramas unless they are raving fundamentalists? (There was a Methodist in "The Village" but they portrayed him more as a High Church Anglican).
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
Have you noticed, by the way, that Nonconformist ministers never feature in TV dramas unless they are raving fundamentalists? (There was a Methodist in "The Village" but they portrayed him more as a High Church Anglican).
Oh yes indeed! I find it really frustrating when I'm trying to explain what my church is like; there are no obvious cultural reference points at all! (ISTM)
People generally won't have heard of my church flavour (the Vineyard movement), which is fine; but I'm yet to find a quick explanation for what our church ethos, the services, the structure etc. are like. A non-conformist but not hardcore fundamentalist church person in a few soaps or dramas would be great.
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
I'm not a Baptist, but have a respect for the tradition. Which is the most important part of being a Baptist for most Baptists?
1. Specific belief in believer's baptism, and the sense of the gathered church, called out from the world. (In which case, radical political dissent is possibly hardly relevant, and independency just 'the tradition').
2. Independency, each congregation running its own affairs - being Baptist rather than Congo is just a division that took place in that tradition about 300 years ago. (In which case one can understand it if there are those who want the BUGB to be no more than a network.)
3. Radical dissent, dating from a time when political debate was conducted in religious terms. (But if so, how relevant is that when political dissent largely took leave of expressing itself this way after 1832?)
4. My parents and grandparents since time immemorial were Baptists, and that's who I am.
Presumably there's some spread on this, with the big chapels in the suburban South East whose ministers get invited to speak at interdenominational evangelical conferences tending to be 1, small rural chapels in East Anglia, 2 - 4, and one lecturer from the local college here that I've met, 3. But what is the general flavour?
And, ExclamationMark, Baptist Trainfan, Polly, Stejjie et al, where would you place yourselves on this? ExclamationMark I get the impression you would see yourself as 3, but I could be wrong.
Or am I completely off track, and it's really about something else?
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
hatless
Shipmate
# 3365
|
Posted
I think that for most people in most churches in the UK, the key factors are the style of the worship and the size and friendliness of the congregation. And by style, I don't mean anything liturgical or ecclesiological, but whether it's more like Radio 4 or Radio 2. And by friendliness, I probably mean whether people feel comfortable in the place, which is often down to how people dress and speak and the level of affluence they have. Plus, do the kids like it? Are there problems with seeing, hearing, and getting in?
A Catholic isn't likely to switch to the local Elim church for these sort of reasons, but there are many denominations close enough that people do migrate between them for entirely non-theological reasons.
Ministers and the few people who get drawn into theology are the happy minority who get to play with the concepts of denominational identity. It's great fun for us all to think about where we've arrived and what we like about it, what we don't like, and how we can spin the description of our denomination's identity in a way that suits us, and perhaps gives a steer to others around us.
I would put congregational government top of my list, but I don't emphasise independence. Rather I see each person's commitment to the whole, and to the process of interacting and discussing respectfully as we 'seek the mind of Christ' as the key thing. In fact I see it as an experience of God, an epiphany or sacrament, if you like.
This isn't why I became a Baptist. It's a version of what it means to be a Baptist that I've only been able to tell since I've been one for many years, and it's taken a few more years for me to be sure that this is the story that I most want to tell.
Interestingly, the church where I now worship was formed in the early 19th Century out of a congregation of both Baptists and Congregationalists, and their desire to walk together while recognising and respecting their differences over baptism is actually written into our founding documents. That pleases me. The process matters more than the product. I would even say that God is in the process.
--------------------
My crazy theology in novel form
Posts: 4531 | From: Stinkers | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Which is the most important part of being a Baptist for most Baptists?
As you rightly note, there will be shades of opinion here (that in itself being a significant Baptist concept). Do also remember that not all Baptists belong to the Baptist Union - there are also Grace Baptists and some churches which are affiliated to the FIEC.
quote:
Specific belief in believer's baptism, and the sense of the gathered church, called out from the world.
The strength of belief in Believers' Baptism will vary, even though it is our "key" distinctive. Many churches have "open" membership and welcome folk who have grown up in other traditions; indeed "re-"baptism here can be quite a contentious issue.
You right to ally Believers' Baptism with becoming part of a discrete Covenanted Community, however I feel this idea has become less evident in most churches over the years. And I would say that the idea of being "gathered out of the world" is no more or less strong than in other evangelical groupings - indeed, Baptist life was born in a period of political turmoil and very much opted in to contemporary events rather than distancing itself from them.
quote:
Independency, each congregation running its own affairs - being Baptist rather than Congo is just a division that took place in that tradition about 300 years ago. (In which case one can understand it if there are those who want the BUGB to be no more than a network.)
Definitely although I think that the Baptist and Congregational/Independent traditions grew up alongside each other. And the timescale is more like 400 years ago: we are "Old Dissent" as opposed to the Methodists' "New Dissent".
quote:
Radical dissent, dating from a time when political debate was conducted in religious terms. (But if so, how relevant is that when political dissent largely took leave of expressing itself this way after 1832?)
See above. I think in the Victorian era much Baptist political expression was subsumed into the general Liberal "Nonconformist Conscience" although possibly most Baptists were from a lower social class than (say) Wesleyan Methodists.
quote:
My parents and grandparents since time immemorial were Baptists, and that's who I am.
Yes, of course - although not to the same extent as being a Catholic. There is also a fairly well-charted progression of people doing well for themselves and ending up as Anglicans.
quote:
Am I completely off track, and it's really about something else?
No, you are right. However - as with most organisations - it's something to do with the inherent "feel" of the thing; for instance, Baptist churches usually feel quite different to Methodist ones. Today they tend (not exclusively) to be informal, evangelical, mildly charismatic, and lower- to middle-middle class. Alongside that there is another tradition of more formal and theologically liberal Baptist "high churches" but these are relatively few (and sometimes feel a bit left out).
This last is the place where I am "at", together with being strongly aware of my heritage of radical dissent, theologically aware preaching, congregational polity and freedom of belief. But I am not sure that many others find themselves in that position.
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
ExclamationMark I get the impression you would see yourself as 3, but I could be wrong.
I think you're pretty much on track with the possible rider of a commitment to being a local church in a local community - i.e. wanting to engage with the world (both immediate and wider) around us.
I'd also say Baptists strive to be interdependent but usually end up more on the independent end of the scale. I actually think that's inevitable and increasing for the reasons I quoted on my post to Polly.
Yes, I'm a 3 but also a 1 and 2 as well. Definitely not a 4 - I have no history of faith in my family let alone in Baptist Churches. From time to time people take opportunity to remind me of the fact.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
True of me too. My parents were German secular Jews who became Anglicans when they came to Britain in 1938, I myself was brought up in the CofE and became a Baptist by conviction.
On the other hand I recall a well-known North Country Baptist leader say that his family didn't go to church, and the Baptist Church was the one they didn't go to! - i.e. they identified with it but rarely went.
[ 13. May 2013, 12:14: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Polly
Shipmate
# 1107
|
Posted
quote:
SvitlanaV2
Are Baptists itching to become 'a voice in the nation'? Why? Isn't that what the CofE's for?
I realise you said "itching" in a more mischievous sense and you could be right with some Baptists and their desire to be heard but for me its different.
In a world where there are so many other voices competing to be heard and many of those are negative and/or unhelpful I would like to think that Baptists can offer a voice that offers another way.
We're not C of E and nor should we try to be in this regard but if we that is 'Baptists' feel we have something of worth to contribute to society then having a voice should flow from this and not from a sense of self rightness.
The joint forum with other church families (already mentioned with the issue on poverty) was a wonderful moment.
So many churches across the spectrum do so much good work within communities and I feel that this needs to be heard.
In a time when so many people are feeling despondent with so many and unsure where to turn it would be good if people knew what already exists that is there for them.
Posts: 560 | From: St Albans | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Polly
Shipmate
# 1107
|
Posted
I'd like to clarify what I meant by Baptists not having a vision as I think I could have done this better with my previous post.
The BUGB identifies x5 core values/principles of what it is to be part of the Baptist Union of Churches.
These could (and IMHO) should) be used as a vision that inspires and encourages all Baptist churches in their own community. As a minister I am very aware of these and we have had a lot of teaching on them this year but I feel the role and responsibility in communicating and driving these must be with the leadership at Baptist House as well as the local associations.
The reality is that folks in the local church may or may not be aware of them but have little or no access to means to see how they connect them with the wider Baptist Church.
It's not as if there are not any forums or a framework for the BUGB leadership to use when speaking about these core values. Every association has regional ministers mtgs, regional assemblies and these can easily act if they wanted to as a focus point to draw people into. But this doesn't happen.
quote:
Enoch posted:
I'm not a Baptist, but have a respect for the tradition. Which is the most important part of being a Baptist for most Baptists?
Sorry to be a cop-out (but you'll find many baptists will be the same!) I don't want to have to choose. I know you are not asking me to do this but I am increasingly finding that although each (well maybe less so no 4!) has some worth and value I no longer want to be driven by these factors.
quote:
Baptist Trainfan
You right to ally Believers' Baptism with becoming part of a discrete Covenanted Community, however I feel this idea has become less evident in most churches over the years. And I would say that the idea of being "gathered out of the world" is no more or less strong than in other evangelical groupings - indeed, Baptist life was born in a period of political turmoil and very much opted in to contemporary events rather than distancing itself from them.
The point about being a 'Covenant Community' is for me the most important part (acknowledging this is not unique to Baptists) of being Baptist.
We covenant in our local church both individually and corporately.
We covenant with our wider body.
But my lament is that we have lost what this means and perhaps if we re-captured the essence of what this means things may be different?
I'd also like to make one small change in your statement. I like Nigel Wright's suggestion that we are to be a 'gathering people rather than a gathered people'.
Posts: 560 | From: St Albans | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
