Autonomy of the Church

Hardshell thanks for the response,
It is interesting that you mention the NAMB effort to plant churches. Just this past couple of weeks the association that my church is in has been told either get on board with the NAMB plan of making church planting THE priority in the association or we will cut the funding to your association for your ADOM! We are a small association (13 churches) in rural Northeastern New Mexico and this would in effect kill the any association work that we have going now. We are being strong armed by the convention via the money that comes to us through NAMB.

So exactly who is the priority? You need to find out what they mean when they say planting churches, because it is not what you might think. The days of churches starting churches with the financial help of the convention are gone in New Mexico. If you want to start a church and don't follow the conventions way of doing things, you get no help. </font>[/QUOTE]I hear you - I know what you're talking about - I've got 10 years of Montana and Wisconsin SBC experience under my belt.

 

I think we did it for the first time at the SBC in Indianapolis in 1992. You might want to check the report from that year. It was about 2 Churches who were ordaining homosexuals If I remember correctly. </font>[/QUOTE]Well on second thought...

I guess there is a mechanism to call for such a vote at the annual national convention, because any messenger may make a recommendation and call for a vote from the floor when the microphones are open. So I was wrong about that.

However, I still stand by my point that such an action on the part of the annual Southern Baptist Convention does not take away that specific local church's autonomy. The Southern Baptist Convention is not taking over that specific local church. All that is happening is that the other member churches of the Southern Baptist Convention are saying that they will no longer associate/cooperate/fellowship with a church which they believe to be in doctrinal error. The particular local church remains autonomous and free to govern itself however its members see fit.

 

You're right. No act of the SBC or the ASSOC takes away a local Church's Autonomy.

But the threat is still there when local church pastors and members willingly give up local autonomy. I see some in the SBC willing to do this.

 

The disfellowshipping of a church does not violate church autonomy. Southern Baptist churches are just as independent as IFBers in that no one can force the congregation to operate in a specific way. You misunderstand what autonomy means.

 

The messengers were not seated at the convention. That is not the same as being "kicked out" of the convention.