Baptist and Puritians

The Puritans and the baptists grew out of English Separatism and were influenced by Pietism. Both groups were governed by congregational polity, and placed strong emphasis on personal piety and "right" behavior. They also generally used less formal worship that centered around the sermon.

In the differences column, the Puritans wished to reform the Anglican church, whereas the baptist wished to separate from it. In addition, the Puritans baptized infants and held to a more sacramental understanding of baptism and the Eucharist. Perhaps most significantly, the Puritans advocated a theocratic government, whereas the baptists were strong supporters of separation of Church and State. It should also be noted that the Puritans had a nasty habit of locking up, flogging, and exiling baptists.

In recent times, the Congregational Churches (the heirs to the Puritans and the Pilgrims)merged with the Christian Churches, drawing in a tradition of adult baptism. Later, they also merged with the German Reformed and Evangelical Churces - creating the modern denomination called the United Church of Christ (or "UCC"). The UCC is perhaps the most liberal of the mainline American denominations, and is in formal partnership with the equally liberal Alliance of Baptists. Our baptist church is affiliated with the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, the Alliance, and the UCC.

The common ground in congregational piety makes the UCC a good fit for baptists looking for stronger ecumenical ties. The liberalism, however, makes it a poor fit for conservative baptist churches.

Joshua

 

The common ground in congregational piety makes the UCC a good fit for baptists looking for stronger ecumenical ties

not to mention the free flow of apostasy.

 

Ransom,

Could you clarify your point? I'm sure it's meant to be patronizing and critical - but I'm not sure what you mean by "free flow of apostasy."

Joshua

 

Joshua, I always wondered what happened to the Puritans, they became UCC huh? Wow, I think the old Pilgrims would be shocked. Seriously, don't you?

 

They would also be shocked to see that the new nation embraced the Baptist view (Roger Williams' view) of separation of church and state instead of their theocracy.

It's interesting that by and large Baptists are far less "liberal" than the descendants of the Puritans who enforced conformity by rule of law.

 

I'm not sure what you mean by "free flow of apostasy."

I mean that I am hard pressed to think of some left-wing pet cause that the UCC doesn't advocate.

One Web page cites the following:

</font>

• Freedom of Choice Concerning Abortion: A Proposal for Action—1971</font>
• General Synod re-affirms the right of women to freedom of choice with regard to pregnancy—1973, 1977, 1979</font>
• Civil Liberties Without Discrimination Related to Affectional or Sexual Preference—1975
  An affirmation that all are equally entitled to civil liberties under the law. OK as far as it goes, but then it mutates into:</font>
• Human Sexuality and the Needs of Gay and Bisexual Persons—1975
  
  A resolution supporting homosexuals in church leadership. So much for "civil rights"; I didn't realize being ordained was a right.</font>
• Recommendations in Regard to the Human Sexuality Study—1977
  
  Supports sex education in schools. Not necessarily a bad thing, but something tells me this Church was not advocating the Biblical standard of married monogamy founded on the creation order.</font>
• Deploring the Violation of Civil Rights of Gay and Bisexual Persons—1977
  
  There's that vacuous word "Civil Rights" again. Condemns the use of the Bible to stir up "hatred" against homosexuals, whatever that means.</font>
• Resolution on Freedom of Choice—1981
  The UCC continues to defend the sanctity of death.</font>
• Institutionalized Homophobia Within the United Church of Christ—1983
  
  No doubt "institutionalized homophobia" refers to the resistance of some clergy/members to its open support of the "civil right" to ordain practicing homosexuals.</font>
• In Response to the Concerns of Same-Gender Oriented Persons and Their Families Within the United Church of Christ—1983
  
  Hey, if Heather has two mommies, who are we to criticize?</font>
• Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS)—1983
  
  "Calls for research, education and legislation to address the AIDS epidemic."</font>
• Recommending Inclusiveness on Association Church and Ministry Committees Within the United Church of Christ—1983
  
  "Recommends openness to the nomination and election of lesbian and gay laypersons and clergy to church and ministry committees." Keep on flogging that dead hobby horse, guys.</font>
• Report of the Task Force for the Study of Human Sexuality—1983</font>
• Calling on United Church of Christ Congregations to Declare Themselves Open and Affirming—1985
  
  Still meeting a little resistance to those who oppose "civil rights," I guess.</font>
• Resolution on Pornography—1987
  
  Abhors pornography. Well, even a stopped clock is right twice a day. Too bad no one told the UCC's most prominent minister, Barry Lynn - he thinks even child pornography is protected under the First Amendment.</font>
• The Right to Privacy—1987
  
  Defends perversion as long as it's "private."</font>
• Sexuality & Abortion, A Faithful Response—1987
  
  This one's hilariously contradictory: it both "[r]eaffirms the right of women to reproductive choice" and "encourage responsible sexual behavior." But doesn't responsibilty entail accepting the consequences of one's actions?</font>[*]Health and Wholeness in the Midst of a Pandemic—1987
  
  More pandering to the AIDS crowd.</font>[*]Sexual Harassment in the Church—No Longer Nameless—1989
  
  A call to "undertake educational programs" dealing with sexual harassment.</font>[*]General Synod reaffirms the United Church of Christ's support for a woman's right to choose a safe, legal abortion—1989
  
  Hobby Horse #2 gets another nod.</font>[*]Deploring Violence Against Lesbian and Gay People—1989
  
  Back to flogging Hobby Horse #1 again. Give it up guys, he ain't getting any deader.</font>[*]Responding to AIDS: An Audit of AIDS Discrimination in the United Church of Christ—1989</font>[*]Responding to AIDS: Endorsement and Enactment of the "Ten Principles for the Workplace"—1989</font>[*]Affirming Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual Persons and Their Ministries—1991
  
  Ho hum. This is getting tiresome.</font>[*]Virginia Privacy Laws—1991
  
  Calls upon the government of Virginia to repeal its sodomy statutes. More useless, agenda-driven drivel.</font>[*]Calling on the Church for Greater Leadership to End Discrimination Against Gay and Lesbians—1993</font>[*]Faithfulness in Committed Relationships—1997
  
  Anything goes as long as it's "committed." Sheesh.</font>[*]Female Genital Mutilation—1997
  Condemns female genital mutilation. They accidentally got this one right too.</font>

It's very telling that a Unitarian Universalist site would so wholeheartedly approve this list. Is the UCC a do-nothing, go-nowhere denomination like the UUs?

[ December 17, 2002, 07:18 PM: Message edited by: Ransom ]

 

The only thing I would say is we do need more AIDS research, study, etc. AIDS and HIV are on epidemic proportions and are killing people from all walks of life; not just gays, or sexually promiscuous people. I know this because my cousin contracted HIV from her husband after he cheated on her. She did not find out until after the birth of her second child. Now she is divorced from him, but she and her two kids have to be tested every few months. She is also on the experimental "cocktail" of medications. When anyone is afflicted with something like this it is bad, but is exponentially worse when that person had done nothing against the norm of society and still comes down with the virus. I pray for the day when AIDS and HIV become things of the past. Other than that, I would agree with everything you said about the UCC and its endorsements. God Bless. Bro. James

[ December 18, 2002, 11:29 AM: Message edited by: Bro. James Reed ]

 

Amen, Brother James.

I'm sorry your family has had so much grief. I know of many stories similar to your family's. Christians need to be on the forefront of AIDS research and provide support for persons and families of persons who have AIDS.

(My brother does research to develop processes to synthesize rare chemicals used in AIDS research and treatment drugs. He has had quite a bit of success and hopes that one day the work he does will be part of a complete solution for persons who have AIDS.

 

I disagree with Joshua. I am not out of the Anglican Church. That would mean i am Protestant and I am not Protestant. I never was and never will be a Roman Catholic by God's grace. The Baptist have been since the beginning of the church though with different names all basically the same. There is a pamphlet out on the subject called the Trail of Blood.

 

The churches in those groups listed in that book would likely not be welcome by most baptist churches today.

 

They weren't even Baptists. "The Trail of Blood" is an influential bit of pseudo-historical fraud. The Baptists are a product of the Radical Reformation in England during the rules of Elizabeth I and James I.

John Smyth, who founded the first Baptist church in 1609, was an Anglican priest who was dismissed for his nonconformist views.

Baptists are Protestant. In fact they are more Protestant than the Reformed, Anglican, Presbyterian, and Lutheran traditions who did not divest themselves completely of their Romanist baggage.

[ December 20, 2002, 12:04 PM: Message edited by: Ransom ]

 

Since I am a baptist and my church is lets just say one of the oldest baptist churchs in the UK
Built in 1600 and show it!! My view on Puritians
is this it started here and went to the USA I live
outside the town called Puritan I know people who
live there and there are no churchs left there the
church is in my town called bridgwater the puritons have a church still going only about 6-10 people Attend average age 75++ but it has stuck
to its ROOTS, my view is the are bible believing
but to the LETTER, all who attend have to LIVE by
the good book otherwise OUT OUT OUT...... This was not the sort of church i wanted for my kids so i tried the Baptist Church and they are bible
believing too but not as TUFF.... If you know what I Mean. But as always we have our problems.
Just like all of you, we just question WHY ?????

Rom : 1619