CBF-NC To Abandon Soul Freedom & Adopt New Baptist Identity

[Big Daddy Weaver]

That's the title of my latest blog post which you can read

[Big Daddy Weaver]

When I read about this proposed Foundational Statement, I was reminded of an event that I was not able to experience but wrote about in my M.A. Thesis and forthcoming book on James Dunn and Soul Freedom:

22 years ago, back in 1988, the Southern Baptist fundamentalists put their own spin on the doctrine of priesthood of all believers with the passage of the controversial Resolution No. 5 which railed against the historic Baptist understanding of that cherished Baptist distinctive and declared that the priesthood of all believers had been used to justify the undermining of pastoral authority in the local church.

R.G. Puckett called Resolution #5 "nothing short of heresy to a genuine Baptist"

Julian Pentecost called Resolution #5 "a mockery of the New Testament's repeated emphasis on the equality of all believers in Christ; and the right and responsibility of each believer to deal directly with God for himself."

North Carolina's Randall Lolley, the former president of SEBTS, lead several hundred messengers in a march to the Alamo in San Antonio where they tore up copies of the resolution. Lolley called it "the most non-Baptist document" he had ever seen.

Southern Baptists had their anti-freedom agenda that touted pastoral authority in interpreting Scripture over the individual.

What we have here, in my opinion, is really not that different; just a different anti-soul freedom agenda being pursued by a much much more likable and friendly, small group of mostly Baptist academics. A false dichotomy has been constructed between the individual and community. Consequently, it is the community (not the individual) who enjoys the right of private interpretation. The individual and his/her freedom of conscience takes a back seat.

I sent this blog post to a much older and wiser Baptist friend who quickly responded: "The more things change the more they stay the same." That seems true.

Fortunately, Fellowship Baptists in North Carolina have a number opportunities in the upcoming weeks and months to speak out, encourage revisions and make sure that this document - as is - doesn't become their Foundational Statement.

If approved, CBF-NC plans to produce curriculum for use in CBF churches to educate congregations about this new Baptist identity.

[Ed Pettibone]

Ed: Aaron, I am a bit surprised to see a proponent of non creedalism rely so heavily on the "Foundational Statements" of CBF National and CBFNC .

I am of the opinion that your title for this thread is a misinterpretation of the intent of CBFNC leadership. It seems to me that a better line would be, CBFNC attemts to put soul freedom in perspective. It also seems that they are not absolutely sure of the final wording of the statement to be put forth, thus the meetings state wide to discuss their proposal and possibly revising it.

I am I for one am willing to allow CBFNC to uphold another longstanding Baptist principle, that namely each Baptist entity is autonomous.

[Stephen Fox]

About all this.

I read your comment stream and it looks petty serious. Strong words from Bruce Gourley and Glenn Jonas all weighing in.
I don't think this is a Stanley Hauerwas coup or anything of the sort; still interesting to see such passion from Jonas and Gourley.

[Big Daddy Weaver]

[Ed Pettibone]

Ed: I wrote to Aaron "I am of the opinion that your title for this thread is a misinterpretation of the intent of CBFNC leadership. It seems to me that a better line would be, CBFNC attemts to put soul freedom in perspective. It also seems that they are not absolutely sure of the final wording of the statement to be put forth, thus the meetings state wide to discuss their proposal and possibly revising it.

I for one am willing to allow CBFNC to uphold another longstanding Baptist principle, that namely each Baptist entity is autonomous."

And Aaron replies, "Perhaps you could explain how these "revisions" have "put soul freedom in perspective." If by "put in perspective," you mean that the theological ideas embodied in that concept have been removed, then yea, it's been put in perspective all right."

Ed: 1. Note the "revisions" are "proposed". ie; They are not cast in stone.
2. Meeting are being held to present this proposal to North Carolinian's and seek their input.

As I said, "I for one am willing to allow CBFNC to uphold another long standing Baptist principle, that namely each Baptist entity is autonomous."

As I understand Aron in Texas and Bruce in Montana, they are calling on the collective to define for NC how they should treat the concept of individual liberty. As Leonard says "Being Baptist is messy."

[Stephen Fox]

http://www.tonycartledge.com/2010/09/cb ... posed.html

Duke Grad, Tim Marsh, has spoken in the comment line there in dissent and opposition to the thinking of Aaron Weaver and Bruce Gourley on this matter.

[Stephen Fox]

in the comment line at the Cartledge blog.
I imagine most who see this are aware of it, but just in case all who get this memo should go to Cartledge blog to see the exchange.

[baptistbornnbred]

So, what makes a "Bapto-Catholic," "Bapto"?

[Tim Bonney]

[Big Daddy Weaver]

Pretty sure baptistbornnbred is well acquainted with the Manifesto. I think his was more of a rhetorical question - something good to think about.

[Tim Bonney]

[Stephen Fox]

http://drjonasblog.blogspot.com/2010/09 ... iever.html

I do hope serious observers will look at the Cartledge blog which closed at 42 responses; one of the best debates, substantive I have seen in some time in Baptist circles.

[baptistbornnbred]

Timothy:
I don't think that anyone is arguing against Baptists identifying with the larger church catholic. Nor is there an argument with the basic theological formulations of the classic creeds--affirmed in large part in the Baptist confessions you mention. Perhaps the concern is the seeming marginalization of liberty of conscience and the separation of church and state in the Baptifesto theological construct. This, along with an apparent desire to make the creeds the center of our Baptist unity, if not identity, seems to diminish the uniqueness of the Baptist tradition.

It also seems to me that this desire to draw stronger connections with the historic church and creeds is a desire to counter the deleterious effects of Enlightenment liberalism that some believe has led to shallow individualistic piety on the one hand and theological libertarianism on the other. These concerns are not without merit, but I'm not sure that throwing the Baptist distinctives under the bus is the answer. As a practical matter, have there really been that many "Lone Ranger" Baptists? (Roger Williams maybe). Rather Baptists have always been drawn to communities of faith and broader connections within and among churches. Moreover, one of the ironies of this "return to Rome" is that it is the profoundly creedal traditions that have been more subject to theological liberalism, if not libertarianism, than Baptists, by and large.

[Bruce Gourley]

For a wider discussion of Bapto-Catholicism, beyond the NC situation, .

[Tim Bonney]

[Tim Bonney]

[Ed Pettibone]

Ed: Tim just to understand your point more clearly, in you experience with Baptist what sort of XYZ did any individual or group attempt to force upon you. It is true that SBC ultra conservatives have enforced their beliefs as expressed in the BF&M 2000 & 2001 on many. Yet not even all Southern Baptist buy into their dominance. And in the ABC-USA it seems to be pretty much every one for him or her self to the point of having no identifiable objective.

[Tim Bonney]

[Bruce Gourley]

Timothy, there is certainly more of an ecumenical spirit in ABC life than the largely-southern based CBF or SBC. As to a possible "overemphasis" on individualism, I think Baptist life certainly allows such to happen, just as the history of creedalism allows an overemphasis on conformity for those who wish to go there. Neither is ideal, nor the best of their respective traditions, but the traditions do allow it.

And it seems to me that if a group of Christians if avowedly centered on the Christ of the New Testament above all else, human creeds will take second place to freedom, for Christ himself preached, lived and taught freedom above and beyond doctrinal formulations. If you are in an environment where creeds represent freedom, I think this is good. But I can tell you that some persons view creeds as the antithesis of freedom.

[Tim Bonney]

[Bruce Gourley]

[Tim Bonney]

[baptistbornnbred]

abp article on this topic with a particularly angry response from K. Massey here: http://www.abpnews.com/content/view/570 ... llComments

[Ed Pettibone]

Why is ABP being blocked by Fire Fox?