Signs We Are Loosing Our Baptist Identity

Friends,

Readers of the Confessing Baptist Blog have probably realized that I have intentionally tried to turn this blog into a resource for practical ministry above all else. Nevertheless, there are times when commentary on contemporary matters is necessary. I believe one such time has come.
I recently began receiving emails titled "Stimulus Package an Attack on Faith" or something like it. Then, Richard Land, guru of all things ethical in the convention weighed in on it from Baptist Press. Then I read a blog over at Founders that blasts Malcolm Yarnell for believing that saved people will and should want to follow Christ faithfully in believer’s baptism.

An attack on faith? Really? Yarnell wrong for holding to believer’s baptism? What’s up?

Regarding the proposed and now passed package, many conservative Christians have been in an uproar over a provision of that package regarding the upgrading of school facilities. In short, the package does not allow funds to be distributed to schools whose primary focus is on religion or facilities in schools where religious assemblies are held. This practically means that seminaries or other "Christian" schools cannot receive funds and that chapels and so forth on secular campuses cannot receive funds. This is what these folks are calling an attack on faith.

Friends, what this really reveals is just how far Baptists have gone in loosing our identity. I even received a snickering jeer from one Baptist pastor while discussing this matter after I told him, "no, we do believe in separation of church and state!" Baptists believe, or at least use to believe, more strongly than anyone else that church and state should be separate. We had been there and done that when church and state was one. One doesn’t have to witness too many Baptists beat, drowned and imprisoned before you start to realize this isn’t a good thing and Christ never desired it all along. We don’t take funds from them and they don’t take it from us. They don’t do anything to encourage or deny particular religions and we don’t do anything to make church and state one. This is a classic- even hallmark- Baptist belief. If our chapel needs an upgrade, we’ll do it. If the prayer rooms needs new paint, we’ll handle it. We gladly count ourselves on our own and, in what may be the last vestige of it in this society, we don’t want a government hand-out for it.

Regardless of the merits of the proposal one way or the other, at the end of the day we can be thankful that government is staying out of religious practice. Richard Land writes in the Baptist press that he sees a danger coming that could even bar students from reading and praying in their dorm rooms. What he fails to see is that those who do such things are probably ready to deal with the supposed "persecution." It’s the rest who are left worrying and squabbling about it.
Then to the matter over at Founders. At heart, I really believe the issue lays between Calvinists wanting to fellowship with other Calvinists regardless of belief in baptism. Some, seemingly such as Ascol, elevate Calvinism as a primary matter over baptism while others, such as Yarnell, find baptism to be no tertiary belief.

To be very clear, I personally believe a man can be saved and not undergo Scriptural baptism. In the sense of, "is this man a brother," I can fellowship with him. But, I can’t allow my conscience to receive such error as a part of fellowship in my church- for I am directly responsible for that. So, we all draw lines and at heart, proper baptism is a significant issue to fellowship- even a greater one than Calvinism. I could be wrong about the whole issue, but one can’t deny that the following scenario has serious implications. Imagine a man comes to church. He is a believer. He was baptized as an infant through sprinkling. Most Southern Baptist churches would require him to be baptized. In other words Baptists believe baptism is an incredibly important part of following Christ- even to the point that we received the name Baptists (shocking, I know). Yet, if that same man came into an otherwise Calvinist leaning Baptist church but he wasn’t a Calvinist and he had been baptized in another Baptist church- he would be received.
I guess at heart the issue is, "which is a greater "test" of fellowship- Calvinism or authentic Baptism." Baptists have long held which side they are going to fall on with this one.

Worry not, however, the ACLJ is on the stimulus case and the endless debate over the roll of Calvinism in fellowship will have no end. This blog will, however.

Let’s remain distinctly Baptist either way.

Blessings,
TJ