Baptists stand traditional church organization on its head. We even turn the visual example of organization used by most church groups on its head.
The traditional model is like a pyramid. At the base is a collection of local churches. At the apex is a national or international denomination. Authority flows from the top down. The higher up on the pyramid, the more authority that level of organization life possesses. That authority is reflected in such terms as “bishop” or “cardinal” or “metropolitan” or any number of other terms used by various Christian groups to designate leaders exercising great power.
Baptist life is exactly the opposite. The pyramid illustration is inverted to demonstrate the point. At the top in Baptist life is the broad array of local churches. That is followed by the associations, state conventions and, finally, the national body as the pyramid narrows to a single point at its base.
In both models a church can be a member of several parts of its denomination whether those parts are called associations or synods or presbyteries or state conventions or dioceses. What is different is that in the traditional model, churches exist as an extension of the parent denomination. The churches serve the denomination. In the Baptist model, the various parts of denominational life exist as extensions of the churches. The denomination exists to serve the churches.
In the traditional model, title to church property is frequently held in the name of the denomination. Many times the denomination plays a major role in determining who the pastor and staff of local churches will be. Financial assessments can be made by the denomination to churches. Programs can be determined by the denomination and announced to the churches.
In Baptist life, each local church holds title to its property, chooses its leadership, determines its financial contributions to cooperative causes as well as what programs and ministries it will offer. No force outside the local church can make decisions for that congregation.
The traditional model emphasizes the national denomination. Positions taken by national bodies become mandatory for local churches. Decisions made by national officers become binding on local congregations.
The Baptist model emphasizes the local church. Positions adopted by the national or state bodies have no binding authority on any other Baptist group. Local churches react to denominational statements as they choose. Decisions made at state and national conventions are the decisions of those making the decisions. They place no obligation on local churches or anyone else.
In the traditional model, the top national officer is primary. In Baptist life, the local church pastor is chief. In fact, top national officers in Baptist life probably have far less impact on local churches than local directors of missions. Baptists generally respond to people they know and work with on a regular basis more than to a remote officeholder.
In the traditional model, denominations can refer to churches as “our churches.” They are Episcopal churches or Methodist churches or Presbyterian churches or Assembly of God churches.
Cooperate but not ‘owned’
In the Baptist model, that is not possible. The association, the state convention, the national convention all offer resources to local churches. Churches may choose to use these resources and to cooperate with sister churches through these resources, but churches are not “owned” by the other areas of Baptist life just because they cooperate.
The only area a Baptist church “joins” is the local association. For state and national conventions, churches choose to cooperate. In neither is there a vote on accepting churches for membership. In fact, Baptists avoid such a notion like the plague. Churches are authorized by their cooperation with state and national conventions to send “messengers” to these bodies, but the messengers, not the churches, make decisions.
Baptists avoid the use of the term “delegate” to illustrate that churches cannot instruct messengers on issues nor are the actions of the “messengers” binding on the churches from which they come. Baptists go to such lengths to avoid any appearance that other areas of Baptist life overshadow the position of the local church.
In Baptist life, only members of a local church can legitimately refer to it as “our church.”
In the traditional model, denominational officials can prevent unauthorized ministries from being included in the program of a church. They can remove access to the church for that ministry, or the denomination can forbid a church from cooperating with a ministry. Denominational approval is required, because churches serve the denomination.
The Baptist model allows no such power. Because the denomination serves the churches, the churches choose what ministries they will use, what literature they will study, what programs they will provide. Often times these are things promoted by the denomination. Sometimes they are not. But a Baptist church is no less a Baptist church just because it partners with a ministry not promoted by the state or national conventions.
Baptist polity has been called a “rope of sand.” It is not supposed to work, but it does. Baptists demonstrate the strength of voluntary cooperation.
For those who focus on the importance of the local church, Baptist polity is a strength. It is a weakness for those more concerned about corporate witness. Baptist polity is a strength for those who trust believers to faithfully respond to the guidance of the Holy Spirit. It is a weakness for those who believe more in the teaching authority of the denomination. Baptist polity is a strength for those who trust the people. It is a weakness for those who believe leaders should set the course that others follow.
Baptist polity as known through the years is now being questioned. It will be interesting to see if this generation of Baptists affirms the “Baptist way” as a strength and practices it or labels Baptist polity a weakness and abandons it for a more traditional hierarchical model.
Share with others: