Some among us were recently up in arms over the decision by Calvary Baptist Church in Washington, DC to call a lesbian couple as co-pastors. The story was even covered by The Washington Post. When I first read the story at the Baptist News Global site, I shrugged my shoulders. It wasn’t that I approved of the decision or felt that it was right in any way, but I wasn’t surprised.
This same church—and I use the word “church” very loosely in this case—ordained a transgender person to ministry in 2014. If they would ordain a transgender person, why was anyone surprised that they would also hire lesbian co-pastors? Yet some in our Southern Baptist tribe spoke out as if this were breaking news. Al Mohler spent over half of the January 10 episode of his podcast addressing the issue and some of its implications. While his commentary is accurate, I still cannot quite understand the attention this story received.
For quite a while now we have known of churches embracing homosexuality. Splinter groups have separated themselves from the Southern Baptist Convention over the issue. Some churches have been removed from our fellowship for accepting homosexuality as good and right, while others have simply left voluntarily. We have been dealing with this issue, and it doesn’t look like it will be going away anytime soon.
I have had to deal with this issue in both the local association and state convention that I was previously a part of through my previous church. While some in our local association opposed taking any kind of stand on the issue, I stood up and spoke in favor of a proposed amendment to our association constitution. The amendment would have defined our position on the issue, thus causing any church taking a different position to be automatically out of fellowship with the association. I also drafted a resolution for the 2015 annual meeting of the Baptist General Association of Virginia which served as a reaffirmation of two resolutions passed by the association in the late 90s concerning homosexuality and so-called same-sex marriage. An edited version of my resolution was passed. Proactively dealing with these issues was necessary in both cases because of various things taking place around us.
One of the issues that Dr. Mohler addressed in his piece was the refusal of the DC Baptist Convention to remove Calvary Baptist from their convention. He wrote:
“But that raises a huge issue, and this arrives most prominently at the door of the District of Columbia Baptist Convention. That convention has not been a paragon of theological conservatism to say the very least, but now they face a very dramatic challenge. If they do not expel Calvary Baptist Church from their membership, then they by very definition simply become a convention that will accept that, indeed, does accept a church that has legally married lesbian copastors in terms of their own membership.”
Of course, he is simply stating the obvious, and he is absolutely right. But another question arises in my mind. How many degrees of separation are needed for continued cooperation? The DC Baptist Convention has a relationship with the Southern Baptist Convention. Can that relationship continue with the DC Baptist Convention becoming “a convention that…does accept a church that has legally married copastors in terms of their own membership”?
What about other groups like the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship? The SBC has no official partnership or relationship with the CBF, but there are plenty of churches that choose to cooperate with both. If the CBF this summer decides to become a welcoming and affirming fellowship, will churches that remain in that fellowship be considered out of friendly cooperation with the SBC because they are voluntarily affiliating themselves with a fellowship that affirms homosexuality even if the church itself does not hold that position?
The tangled web this whole issue weaves can get very messy very quickly. Where will we draw the line? How many degrees of separation are needed? What about the SBC church that does a mission trip with a welcoming and affirming church even if the SBC church does not approve of the welcoming and affirming church’s position on homosexuality?
I’m not sure I have many specific answers. We must stand for truth, but we cannot spend all of our time off in the weeds chasing snakes. It is definitely a strange day in which we live. I’m interested in hearing your thoughts. How many degrees of separation are needed for cooperation?
Those are very good questions? I think the answer to your questions is Thom Rainer’s favorite answer, it depends. You would think this is a no brained, but each church, each association, and each convention get their own choices. I’m of the opinion that we all lost significant ground in the stand for truth on this issue when some of our leaders have an enthusiastic endorsement to a president who supports gay marriage.
There is a difference between meeting with, participating with, joining together and being in one accord.
I am willing to MEET WITH just about any religious group. If the Gov asked me to meet with him as part of a council of religious leaders that included Catholics, Mormons and even Muslims and other faiths I would have no pblm because it is not my org. I am not affirming the beliefs of any group in any way.
Those I am willing to PARTICIPATE WITH is a slightly smaller group. If I am part of an SBC Disaster Relief group and a Muslim DR group shows up (are there any?) I would have no pblm participating with them in helping meet the human needs. I would even be willing to coordinate our efforts to maximize the help we can provide. Once again this does not require me to affirm anything.
But when I am JOINING TOGETHER with others I have crossed a line. Now I am now officially and formally in the same organization. So I am at some level saying I affirm these people as brothers in Christ. The best example of this to me is a local Ministerial Alliance. I believe my church can join together with AoG churches, E Free, Lutheran or even Catholic churches with out compromising my Baptist beliefs because we share a common core set of orthodox Christian beliefs. BUT if a church affirms gay marriage, homosexual pastors, advocates FOR abortion or believes that salvation is not by grace through faith in Jesus Christ alone then I would have to withdraw as an official part of that organization of churches because I do not want to identify my congregation as affirming those unbiblical stands. Woman pastors, alcohol use, differences in church polity are non-issues.
BEING IN ONE ACCORD is just that. We do not have to be exactly the same in our beliefs and practices. But we need to be very close; BF&M type close.
You rightly say that there are high weeds in all this.
A question: you say “The DC Baptist Convention has a relationship with the Southern Baptist Convention.”
How so? I may be uninformed here but the SBC has relationships with churches. Associations also?
You speak of churches being “automatically out of fellowship” with an association. I rather think that this isn’t as automatic as I’ve seen a few AMs imply, as if an investigation and vote isn’t required. We have to face the reality that SBC groups (national, state, and association) have to expel churches, which can be ugly. Associations are the logical first choice for action.
Should the SBC do wholesale expulsions of churches with dual affiliations where the ‘other’ group is sufficiently awry in their theology? Depends. There’s not only CBF but the various black denominations, and various affinity groups.
If we go down this road we should get used to yet another CP reduction program.
“How so? I may be uninformed here but the SBC has relationships with churches. Associations also?”
When a state convention forwards funds from local churches to the SBC, is that not a relationship?
http://www.dcbaptist.org/history
State conventions have direct relationships but i don’t believe associations do. So far as I recall, the SBC (and, separately, states) expel churches. Don’t know what the solution is for aberrant associations, other than churches pulling out and starting their own.
The threat of lower CP giving should have no bearing on us doing what is right.
Depends.
Adam,
I look for us all to be up in arms and never to lose the shock and amazement each time one of our own calls God a liar in arrogant disobedient and self-justification. I fully expect to have a sense of disbelief and disgust no matter how many Calvary Baptist episodes arrive.
The devil and the LGBTQ enterprise have both come to assume our passive, Oh Well, lay down posture. They trained us and we comply.
“Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a person commits are outside the body, but whoever sins sexually, sins against their own body.” (I Corinthians 6:18)
We are contending with all this verse implies. We refuse to make the associations of sickness and disease. Mental illness also mirrors these sins against the body.
Paul, despite knowing the Corinthians, was still seemingly caught off guard upon learning of the man sleeping with his stepmother. (I Cor. 5) Might he have yawned in common-place boredom or might he have pitched a conniption fit if this man and woman were “enthusiastically” affirmed as the Co-Pastors of the First Baptist Church of Corinth?
Most importantly, lets also keep Matthew 18:6-7 in mind and find some daily, Godly anger for the thoughts and offense being forced upon our children. Homosexuality is a verb, not a harmless alternative identity.
“It will be terrible for people who cause even one of my little followers to sin.
Those people would be better off thrown into the deepest part of the ocean with a heavy stone tied around their necks!
The world is in for trouble because of the way it causes people to sin.
There will always be something to cause people to sin, but anyone who does this will be in for trouble.”
Glenn, I hear you and mostly agree. My point was simply that this “church” had already forsaken orthodox Christian beliefs when they ordained a transgender person, if not before then. If you and others were surprised when they then hired lesbian co-pastors, fine. But I hardly think there’s a biblical mandate based on the example you quoted for me to be equally surprised. My lack of surprise doesn’t make me any less against what they have done. It doesn’t mean that I have any higher view of this “church” than you do. As far as I am concerned, they have forsaken the faith. Let’s treat this “church” as Paul instructs us to treat the sexually immoral professing Christians within our own congregations (1 Cor. 5:11).
Forgive my preachy-ness Adam. Not meant towards you.
I hope to see our churches and leaders with appropriate boldness and courage when facing this and all matters of flagrant, proud apostasy.
As Paul said, “You are proud, when you ought to feel bad enough to chase away anyone who acts like that.” (I Cor. 5:2)
Disassociation, just as passive compliance, can come in many forms.
Adam,
First, I to reiterate that I was unaware of Calvary Baptist’s previous formation of a transgender individual. I have to agree with Glenn. While I am not shocked that another liberal church has chosen to thumb its nose at God and His scripture, I am shocked and will always be shocked to the very core when a group refers to themselves, and I use this term is loosely as you do, a church yeah proceeds to commit sins against God. I said it before and I’ll say it again, Calvary Baptist qualifies as a church as much as Westboro Baptist qualifies as a church.
Allen, I really enjoyed your comments and they’ve got me thinking about situations occurring in my own locality. We, as the leaders of individual churches, must be cautious as to the groups will affiliate ourselves. Berkeley Baptist Church is affiliated with the Southern Baptist Convention, the West Virginia Convention of Southern Baptist, and the Blue Ridge Baptist Association. However, this year we also partnered with a nondenominational, elderly an and the Blue Ridge Baptist Association. However, this year we also partnered with a nondenominational, elder led Church in Scranton, Pennsylvania. As a part of our affiliation with West Virginia Southern Baptists, we are also affiliated with the Florida Baptist Convention. None of these concern me “theologically speaking” as much as my local ministerial association.
There is a necessity for degrees of separation. Allen is right on both fronts. As the apostasy of the American church continues, the need to reevaluate and break ties is going to increase. This will hurt the CP. The great question is, if Jesus returns, what would we rather see Him find: a big convention that has a large CP but is theologically compromised or a faithful remnant that perseveres in Gospel truth?
Hey Joey, I know. No offense intended.
No offense taken my brother. Just throwing it out there. Blessings!
I would think that the SBC should no longer associate with the DC Baptist Convention since they do not hold to our beliefs in this manner. As far as with churches that associate with both the CBF and the SBC, I would think we could still keep them in the SBC as long as they don’t take a stand that homosexuality is right. To do otherwise could unfairly make a stand against a church that truly stands for Christ.