Baptist Polity of Autonomy

Complaints: none.


The subject is autonomy. I am pointing out what appear to be inconsistencies in what should be considered an autonomous entity: a New Testament Assembly.

Given: every believer in an assembly has one vote. The assembly votes unanimously to choose delegates to be representatives at an annual convention.

That makes a representative form of government --no longer a pure democracy.

Does this not compromise automomy?

This is a debate forum--please do not take my posts as personal vindettas.

Selah,

Bro. James

 

I am not so sure a pure democracy is taught in the New Testament. Perhaps you could show me where it is taught?

 

Anytime you have a denomination of churches some of the autonomy of the local church is lost, whether SBC, CBA, ABC, GARBC, etc. A denomination usually has multiple aspects of ministry which may include: schools, mission agencies, publication and printing outlets, service agencies, etc. and may get involved in church property issues as well.

Some pastors and their churches refuse to be involved in any group so that they can maintain their complete autonomy. Others have chosen to be involved in a pastor's fellowship (FBF, BBF, SWBF, etc.) which does not directly involve the church, though it does identify a church with the overall group. Still others have chosen a fellowship of churches (sometimes the word association is used) to provide a vehicle for fellowship and ministry. In any case, every church must decide where they stand on this issue and choose to stand there.

There is clear evidence that the NT churches of the first century cooperated on some level, but the details and exact structure is not given in Scripture. So we must choose our preferences and take our stand as we believe.

I have chosen to be involved with both a state fellowhship and a national association neither of which has the trappings of a denomination so that there is little or no control surrendered in being involved with them.