Wednesday, May 11, 2011

Autonomous: To Be or Not To Be

I wish I were a brilliant historian. I would have a big title, a big salary, and a big list of books carrying my name as author. Alas, I am no such creature. So I must gather a foundation for my thoughts in other ways or simply give my opinion.

Federalism versus States' Rights. Autonomous local church versus autonomous association versus autonomous state convention versus autonomous national convention. By the way probably Southern Baptists are the only ones who understand the implications of this previous sentence. We have ongoing crises among Southern Baptists because of misunderstandings and an outright wrong approach to the concept of autonomy and its sister concept of connectionalism. We have ongoing discussions about the cause of the Civil War. Was its cause grounded in slavery or was slavery simply the chosen issue over which the battle for a strong central government versus strong states' rights was finally fought rather that tariff questions or rules governing international trade agreements or the right to print your own money (or maybe even how many wives you could have)?

Alas, I am not that brilliant scholar in American history. So, as to the other issue, why is there so much emotional upheaval among Baptists over autonomy and a proper understanding of connectionalism? It has everything to do with priesthood of the believer and organizational freedom. At this fall's annual meeting for the NC Baptist State Convention, messengers will hear a report concerning the 2000 Baptist Faith and Message. Should the state convention accept it as our confessional document or stick with the 1963 BF&M?

This question has arisen because one messenger said we have a "mess" if we don't address it. Where's the mess? The national convention with less than 10,000 messengers supposedly representing sixteen million members adopted the 2000 as drawn up by a presidentially hand picked committee. The 1963 version was drawn up and presented by a committee composed of the executinve directors of the various state conventions, people chosen by the states from which they came!

If NC Baptists have a mess, it is because someone has forgotten that great Baptist element called connectionalism and its relationship to autonomy. In the Encyclopedia of Southern Baptists (c. 1958, vol. I, p. 99), the article author quotes the SBC constitution and then adds his own comments. "'While independent and sovereign in its own sphere, the Convention does not claim and will never attempt to exercise any authority over any other Baptist body, whether church, auxiliary organizations, association, or convention.' This limitation is prompted by the theological proposition that each church is independent and autonomous. No other body may usurp the authority of the church."

We are "connected" as NC Baptists to the SBC by choice, choosing to cooperate as we mutually desire. We do not have to follow the SBC in each step it takes, nor does it create a mess when we choose not to do so.

We do not have a mess except when someone decides to turn our convention into a strong federalist organization instead of the local church rights, associational rights, state convention rights organization it was designed to be. We are connected as a community, not as a family bowing before the ruling patriarch who dictates how the entire family will live.

If we are blessed as a state convention, the committee that has been appointed by the president of the convention will remember that we are autonomous and serve together through a clearly defined connectionalism. They will recommend that we maintain our freedom by continuing to function under the 1963 BF&M, a document that was prepared in part by our own elected personnel. When we forget our foundations of autonomy and connectionalism, then we will have a mess! And I really don't want to have to lead my association to assert its autonomous rights.