Reformed Baptist polity

Status
Not open for further replies.

elnwood

Puritan Board Junior
I'm picking up on a previous thread about whether to be a Baptist is to be congregational.

As far as I know, no major Baptist association mandates a particular form of governance but allows each congregation to govern how they wish. I think that, in the strictest sense, to be Baptist is to be congregational.

Pastor Philip Way made a list of distinctives of Reformed Baptists, and one of them is Congregational.
http://providencerbc.blogspot.com/2007/08/about-us-reformed-baptist-distinctives.html

As I mentioned before, this is the strictest sense of what it means to be Reformed Baptist. I don't even qualify according to the list because I'm not Sabbatarian.
 
What does it mean to be a Baptist?

Baptist means Baptism, not polity.....

I know Primitive Baptist who have presbyteries in the 1700s and 1800s, I know a Baptist denomination in Africa that is Prelatist...... Baptist have congregational elements but many Particular Baptist in history have been elder rule....

I think the issue we are having is Congregationalism and Independancy... getting the two together and combining them... they are seperate..... Independancy is distinct from Congregationalism. Most Baptist are Independant of course note the Primitive Baptist and the Congo Prelatist Baptist Above.. Historically Arminian Baptist are both congregational and Independant but most particular baptist in history have been elders rule...

Mark Dever has a good book on Elders rule in Independancy polity and gives good historical record of elders rule among baptist...

Michael

I'm picking up on a previous thread about whether to be a Baptist is to be congregational.

As far as I know, no major Baptist association mandates a particular form of governance but allows each congregation to govern how they wish. I think that, in the strictest sense, to be Baptist is to be congregational.

Pastor Philip Way made a list of distinctives of Reformed Baptists, and one of them is Congregational.
http://providencerbc.blogspot.com/2007/08/about-us-reformed-baptist-distinctives.html

As I mentioned before, this is the strictest sense of what it means to be Reformed Baptist. I don't even qualify according to the list because I'm not Sabbatarian.
 
Mark Dever has a good book on Elders rule in Independancy polity and gives good historical record of elders rule among baptist...

But, Mark Dever would emphasize that it is "Elder Led, Congregational Rule" not strictly "Elder Rule." He makes much (some John Piper lingo, there) of the idea that congregationalism is a hallmark of Baptists.

In fact, when Baptists first came out of the church of England, one of the things they separated for was congregationalism. This may look different in different churches, as you show, but it is congregationalism, none the less.
 
So the 1800s Primitive Baptist that had Presbyteries are not Baptist?

or the

Congo Prelatist Baptist that have Bishops and ArchBishops above Pastors are not Baptist?

I can think of Baptist groups in all church polities that currently exist......

Polity does not make a Baptist...

And Baptist did not come out of the church of England because of congregationalism... First strain to leave were Indepentants both Paedo's and Credos together... Then Credos further seperated from Paedo Indepentant churches.... The independant church government that came out of the church of england was not congregationalism and did not have the elements of congregationalism of today.... Congregationalist were called Congregationalist but they were elders rule Indepenant churches.... Americans have wrapped their concepts of what congregationalism is into the mold with our Democratic ideas......

But aside from that.... As per the opening post, Polity does not make a Baptist!!!!! Baptism does.... All 4 Polity systems can be found among Baptist groups... What does that tell you about what makes a Baptist? that polity does not make one.......


Mark Dever has a good book on Elders rule in Independancy polity and gives good historical record of elders rule among baptist...

But, Mark Dever would emphasize that it is "Elder Led, Congregational Rule" not strictly "Elder Rule." He makes much (some John Piper lingo, there) of the idea that congregationalism is a hallmark of Baptists.

In fact, when Baptists first came out of the church of England, one of the things they separated for was congregationalism. This may look different in different churches, as you show, but it is congregationalism, none the less.
 
All I was doing was correcting your usage of Mark Dever. He would NOT suggest that elder rule is appropriate in a Baptist church. I was also saying was that the term "Congregationalism" is broad. See Wikipedia below:

Congregationalist polity, often known as congregationalism, is a system of church governance in which every local church congregation is independent, ecclesiastically sovereign, or "autonomous."

All congregationalism means is that each local congregation is independent. There is no outside ecclesiastical authority. There may have been some Baptists that maintained a Baptist name but did not hold to congregationalism, but a standard understanding of Baptist polity is that it is, in some measure, congregational.
 
What does it mean to be a Baptist?

Baptist means Baptism, not polity.....

That's like saying Presbyterian means polity, not Calvinism.

Again, I'm talking about being "Baptist" in a strict sense. For example, would you consider Pentecostals to be Baptists? I know they certainly wouldn't.

Mark Dever has a good book on Elders rule in Independancy polity and gives good historical record of elders rule among baptist...

I attended Dever's church for a number of years. As Calvibaptist wrote, Dever teaches against elder's rule and affirms elder-led congregationalism. That work you're referring to is writing in favor of a plurality of elders, including lay elders, instead of a single pastor, ruling deacons model that is found in many Baptist churches today.
 
John Piper, in response to the question "Would we still be Baptists?" (http://www.desiringgod.org/media/pdf/baptism_and_membership/QuestionsAndAnswers.pdf)

Yes, and we would be unashamed of that great heritage. Some in this tradition shared the conviction that we are proposing. What would continue to make us Baptists is that we would only believe, teach, and practice baptism of believers by immersion. In addition, we believe in the goal of a regenerate church membership, and we involve the congregation in the governance of the church.
 
Interesting:

The Baptist recipe includes several key beliefs or doctrines:

--the Lordship of Jesus Christ

--the Bible as the sole written authority for faith and practice

--soul competency

--salvation from sin and eternal death to forgiveness and eternal life only by faith in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior who is the grace gift of God

--the priesthood of each believer and of all believers in Christ

--believer’s baptism

--baptism and the Lord’s Supper as wonderfully symbolic but not essential for salvation

--church membership composed only of persons who have been born again

--religious freedom and its corollary, the separation of church and state

Built upon the foundation of these beliefs are certain practices or polities that are part of the Baptist recipe:

--congregational church governance under the Lordship of Christ

--the autonomy of churches

--voluntary cooperation for various causes


Closely related to these beliefs and practices are a number of emphases that characterize most Baptists:

--evangelism

--missions

--Christian education

--ministry

--social concern

Baptist Distinctives

In brief, the Bible sets forth these truths in regard to soul competency:



--Individuals have a God-given competency to know God and his will.

--God, who is sovereign over all creation, has provided this freedom

--This competency is a gift from God and not a human creation.

--Persons therefore are free to make choices; they are not puppets.

--God does not force or coerce compliance with his will; neither faith nor love

can be forced.

--With this competency and freedom comes responsibility and accountability.

Choices have consequences.

--In exercising soul freedom, a person should seek insight from members of the

faith community, both present and past.

--The individual is responsible for choices. Faith response must be by the

individual and not by a group of which the individual is part.

--Governments and religious organizations ought not force persons to belong to any particular church, confess any specific creed or conform to any form of worship. To do so violates liberty of conscience and flies in the face of God’s will for his creation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top