Historical Precedence for Ordination Practices

Frogman · Nov 20, 2005

Dear Brethren,
Does anyone know of the historical sources for the practice among Old Particular Baptists that a call to a particular pastorate equalled local ordination?

I am asking this for personal reasons as well as historical perspective.

Bro. Dallas

Frogman · Nov 20, 2005

Bump.

I am interested in this because some landmarkers are arguing I have no authority to pursue a radio ministry.

I was ordained by the Sovereign Grace Baptist church in Cookeville we were involved in its organization last August (04). They called me as pastor during the organization meeting and voted to have that call be my ordination during the same meeting.

With representatives of three Baptist churches and two preaching brethren, present, there was no opposition at the time.

Just wandering about the historical practice of this, one of the preachers present did cite an historic practice of this type among Old English Baptists.

Despite the landmark shrieks of pain for the sounds of their shattering chain links and the deaths of many of their mothers, I am resolved to pursue this radio ministry.

I formally presented it to Unity Baptist this morning, gave them opportunity to speak against it, witnessed no movement;

The door has been opened of the Lord and it is time that I do move...inmho.

I said as much to the body this morning so you guys don't think I am speaking boldly out of school.

Any ideas on historical perspectives?

Bro. Dallas

OleSchoolBaptist · Nov 20, 2005

Check out the 1689 Confession of Faith.

Besides why care what these men say concerning a ministry your church is pursuing.

rsr · Nov 20, 2005

From the London Baptist Confession (1646):

Being thus joined, every church hath power given them from Christ, for their wellbeing, to choose among themselves meet persons for elders and deacons, being qualified according to the word, as those which Christ hath appointed in His testament, for the feeding, governing, serving, and building up of His Church; and that none have any power to impose on them either these or any other.
Click to expand...

(Emphasis added)

From the Philadelphia Baptist Confession (1742):

The members of these churches are saints by calling, visibly manifesting and evidencing in and by their profession and walking, their obedience unto that call of Christ; and do willingly consent to walk together, according to the appointment of Christ, giving up themselves to the Lord, and one to another, by the will of God, in professed subjection to the ordinances of the Gospel.

To each of these churches thus gathered according to His mind, declared in His Word, He hath given all that power and authority, which is any way needful for their carrying on that order in worship and discipline, which He hath instituted for them to observe, with commands and rules, for the due and right exerting, and executing of that power.

A particular church, gathered and completely organized according to the mind of Christ, consists of officers and members; and the officers appointed by Christ to be chosen and set apart by the church, so called and gathered, for the peculiar administration of ordinances, and execution of power or duty, which He entrusts them with, or calls them to, to be continued to the end of the world, are bishops, or elders, and deacons.

The way appointed by Christ for the calling of any person, fitted and gifted by the Holy Spirit, unto the office of bishop, or elder, in a church is, that he be chosen thereunto by the common suffrage of the church itself; and solemnly set apart by fasting and prayer, with imposition of hands of the eldership of the church, if there be any before constituted therein: and of a deacon that he be chosen by the like suffrage, and set apart by prayer, and the like imposition of hands.
Click to expand...

The Separate Baptists on the frontier developed their own ordination requirements:

Churches were constituted by local constituents who required no approval from ecclesiastical tribunals. Many Baptist ministers were so-called "farmer-preachers," individuals who lived in the community, worked the land throughout the week, and preached on Sunday. These grass-roots ministers were often semiliterate or self-taught persons who exercised gifts of proclamation and ministry in the churches. Their bivocational occupations kept them close to the soil and to the people.

Frontier Baptists developed procedures for recognizing and ordaining potential ministers. Debates continued over the education of ministers, clergy compensation, and the nature of ministerial authority--unending controversies in Baptist life. Ordination to ministry generally required a statement of conversion and "call" as verified by the congregation. One initiatory step involved "licensing," whereby a congregation formally vouched for an individual's calling and provided a kind of ministerial apprenticeship prior to ordination.
Click to expand...

— Bill Leonard in Baptists in Appalachia, Baptist History and Heritage, Summer-Fall, 2002

Some Baptists have taken a dim view of the entire proposition of ordination. An example is Charles H. Spurgeon:

Whence comes the whole paraphernalia of ordination as observed among some Dissenters? Since there is no special gift to bestow, why in any case the laying on of empty hands? Since we cannot pretend that mystic succession so vaunted by Ritualists, why are men styled "regularly ordained ministers"? A man who has preached for years is Mr. Brown, but after his ordination or recognition he develops into the Reverend Mr. Brown; what important change has he undergone?
Click to expand...

— Sword and Trowel Volume 4, 1874, pages 111-117

SPURGEON ON ORDINATION AND RELIGIOUS TITLES

rlvaughn · Nov 20, 2005

Bro. Dallas, this doesn't really add anything, but I am confused as to what they are objecting. Is it because the ordination was by a local church only, with no call to sister churches to participate; or is it because there was no laying on of hands or special ceremony; or is it something else?

Frogman · Nov 20, 2005

Originally posted by rlvaughn:
Bro. Dallas, this doesn't really add anything, but I am confused as to what they are objecting. Is it because the ordination was by a local church only, with no call to sister churches to participate; or is it because there was no laying on of hands or special ceremony; or is it something else?
Click to expand...

Dear Brother Vaughn,
The church in Cookeville did this during their organizational meeting.

The group enjoyed the blessing and presence of members of two sister churches and blessings of a third.

One Church is Raleigh Springs Baptist in Memphis, do you know that body and its pastor Brother Duplechain?

During the meeting, Brother Ray Angus moderated, the original missionary to this group but having been called to pastor by Mt. Vernon MB in Fayetteville, AR (so that makes four churches) the other two are pastored by Brother Steve Wilkinson?? I am not certain of this brother's name, but the churches are located in NC.

I will try to find the statement read to call the meeting to order, it included in it the four churches extending a hand.

After the church was recognized as a body; Brother Ray brought the issue to the floor concerning who the church desired to call as pastor. They indicated myself. He then asked the process of ordination, the church indicated by local authority of call with no future formal meeting planned.

That was in August, in October I was called to Unity in Paron.

Unity, I guess is just not recognizing the local authority ordination. Let me stress this is not due to our being in disfellowship with Cookeville, we are not.

Unity is accustomed to the formal meetings and laying on of hands, etc.

BTW, after the meeting brother Duplechain preached the charge to the church and to its pastor, me.

Brother Angus also spoke, then I spoke briefly.

Bro. Dallas

Frogman · Nov 20, 2005

Originally posted by OleSchoolBaptist:
Check out the 1689 Confession of Faith.

Besides why care what these men say concerning a ministry your church is pursuing.
Click to expand...

Dear OleSchoolBaptist,
Thanks for the reference.

I am not too concerned about what these men are saying. I have already answered them that neither themselves nor any other body called me into the ministry.

The stricter landmark view, however is capable of causing me trouble. except the fact that I have completely discussed this ministry with Unity and they have not opposed it.

I am satisfied the landmark position, if really in support of local authority (autonomy of the local assembly) will have no position.

Bro. Dallas

rlvaughn · Nov 21, 2005

Bro. Dallas, thanks for the explanation. I know of some of the men you mention, but do not know any of them personally. As far as historical precedent, I think it is there. But as far as advice, there will always be a fight for you to fight since you were not ordained in the standard way. Is that a battle you want to fight from now on?

I personally believe in following the example of laying-on-of-hands. But I am reminded of how ordinations were conducted around here among the missionary Baptists of the ABA in the 1970s & 1980s. They followed what is probably fairly standard procedure for missionary Baptists in the south, calling a council and electing a moderator, clerk, person to give the charge, etc. But someone would always make a point, after the church voted to ordain the person, to say that at that point the person was ordained. Nevertheless, for whatever reason, they were never willing to follow their belief to its logical conclusion - that a church should simply vote on the candidate and consider him ordained.

Frogman · Nov 21, 2005

Dear Brethren,
thanks for all your help and references. This is certainly not a fight I want to have to continue in each time I may move.

On the other hand,knowing who called me into the ministry, it is difficult to disagree with Spurgeon's statment above.

Did he ever receive ordination?
May God bless,
Bro. Dallas

rsr · Nov 22, 2005

No, he didn't.

Frogman · Nov 22, 2005

Didn't think so.

canadyjd · Nov 22, 2005

Yes, he did.

Spurgeon: A new biography by Arnold Dallimore. Banner of Truth Trust. 1999.

p.47.

Spurgeon accepted the call to the New Park Street church, London, at the age of 19. The deacons requested he have an ordination service.

"Spurgeon told them he did not believe this was a scriptural practice and that he did not need it to validate his ministry....Nevertheless, he was willing to go through with the ceremony if the church thought it necessary. And although it would do him no harm neither would it do him any good. And there the matter rested."

peace to you

Squire Robertsson · Nov 22, 2005

Lo many moons ago, my church admin teacher required us preacher boys to put together the start of out office files. One of the items required for the project was five church constitutions. Of the five, one church had an interesting ordination clause:

Not wanting to impose the decision of this body on another, ordinations carried out by this church are only valid while that person is serving here.
Click to expand...

Methinks, the writer(s) of this clause took the late Dr. Richard Weeks' polity classes much too seriously. Also, this church was located in southern Wisconsin, not exactly Primitive/Missionary/Landmark territory.
It has been my experience that churches rely on the principle of reciprocity when dealing with ordinations.
Now for my rabbinical opinion, considering the church in which you serve and hold membership</font>

accepts your previous ordination.</font>

approves your radio ministry. (It is a "ministry of the local church", isn't ?)</font>

You and your church are on solid ground. However, there are some brethren who would like to turn associations into presbyteries. Oh, well.

rsr · Nov 22, 2005

Originally posted by canadyjd:
"Spurgeon told them he did not believe this was a scriptural practice and that he did not need it to validate his ministry....Nevertheless, he was willing to go through with the ceremony if the church thought it necessary. And although it would do him no harm neither would it do him any good. And there the matter rested."

I think you have misintrepeted the passage; "there the matter rested" means nothing else was done.
Click to expand...

canadyjd · Nov 22, 2005

Perhaps you are correct. Do you have any sources that specifically say he was not ordained?

peace to you

Frogman · Nov 22, 2005

I wonder what Mr. Dallimore's sources are?

I have read of Spurgeon's statement concerning ordination and have never read that he received the ordination at the hands of men.

Bro. Dallas

rsr · Nov 22, 2005

Christian History & Biography online attests to it, and there are other sources whose veracity I can't testify to. However, I have never seen it argued that he was ordained.

He commented more than once upon ordination, never with approbation.

In Our Gifts and How to Use Them (from 1872, 28 years after accepting the call to pastor New Park Street Chapel), Spurgeon says, using 2 Timothy 1:6 as his text:

Now, it was no doubt the custom to lay on hands at the ordination of Christian ministers by the apostles, and there was an excellent reason for this, for gifts were thereby conveyed to the ordained, and when we can find anybody who can confer some spiritual gift upon us, we will be glad to have their hands laid on our heads; but we don’t care for empty hands. Rites cease when their meaning ceases. If practiced any longer they lead to superstition, and are fit instruments of Roman Catholic priests.

The upholding of the hands of the eldership, when they give their vote to elect a man to the pastorate, is a wise proceeding, and is, I suspect, all the apostle means when he speaks of the elders; but empty hands it seems to me are fitly laid on empty heads, and to submit to an empty ceremony is an idle waste of time. If Paul were here, and could confer a gift, we would rejoice to receive it; yes, and if the lowliest man in Christendom, or woman, could confer the smallest amount of grace by the laying on their hands, we would bow our head in the lowliest manner; till then we will beg to decline submitting to the imposition, or assisting in it.

For this reason, and others, we cannot use the text exactly as it stands in addressing this congregation, but leaving out the reference to laying on of hands, we may honestly, without violation of the current of inspiration, proceed to exhort each one of you to fan into flame the gift that is in you.
Click to expand...

[ November 22, 2005, 11:25 PM: Message edited by: rsr ]

rsr · Nov 22, 2005

Originally posted by Frogman:
I wonder what Mr. Dallimore's sources are?

I have read of Spurgeon's statement concerning ordination and have never read that he received the ordination at the hands of men.

Bro. Dallas
Click to expand...

I think Dallimore's passage means that the church wanted to ordain Spurgeon, but he declined on principle, though he would, if necessary, go through the ritual, and the matter was therefore dropped.

This is from a letter he wrote shortly after he was informed New Park Street Chapel wanted him to become pastor:

... I sit down to communicate to you my thoughts and feelings with regard to a public recognition. I am sure I need not request your notice of my sentiments, for your usual good judgment is to me a rock of reliance. I can trust any matter with you, knowing that your kindness and wisdom will decide rightly.

I have a decided objection to any public ordination or recognition. I have, scores of times, most warmly expressed from the pulpit my abhorrence of such things, and have been not a little notorious as the opponent of a custom which has become a kind of iron law in the country. I am willing to retrace my steps if in error; but if I have been right, it will be no very honorable thing to belie my former loud outcries by submitting to it myself.

I object to ordinations and recognitions, as such Because I am a minister, and will never receive authority and commission from man; nor do I like that which has the shadow of such a thing about it. I detest the dogmas of apostolic succession, and dislike the revival of the doctrine by delegating power from minister to minister.

(2) I believe in the glorious principle of Independency. Every church has a right to choose its own minister; and if so, certainly it needs no assistance from others in appointing him to the office. You, yourselves, have chosen me; and what matters it if the whole world dislikes the choice? They cannot invalidate it; nor can they give it more force. It seems to me that other ministers have no more to do with me, as your minister, than the crown of France has with the crown of Britain. We axe allies, but we have no authority in each other's territories. They axe my superiors in piety, and other personal matters; but, ex officio, no man is my superior.

We have no apostles to send Titus to ordain. Prelatic power is gone. All we are brethren.

(3) If there be no authority inferred, what is the meaning of the ceremony? "It is customary." Granted; rebut we are not all Ecclesiastical Conservatives; and, moreover, I know several instances where there has been none. Rev. W. Robinson, of Cambridge, agrees with me, I believe; and has not endured it himself. Rev. J. Smith had nothing of it, nor had Rev. Burton, of Cambridge, nor Rev. Wooster, of Landbeach, etc., etc.

... I trust, my dear Sir, that you will not imagine that I write warmly, for I am willing to submit; but it will be submission. I shall endure it as a self-mortification, in order that you may all be pleased. I would rather please you than myself; but still, I would have it understood by all the church that I endure it as a penance for their sake. I find the friends do not care much about it, and others have, like myself, a decided aversion. I am your servant; and whatever is for the good of the church, let it be done. My knowledge is little; I simply express my feelings, and leave it entirely with you. ...
Click to expand...

rsr · Nov 22, 2005

Pardon for overlooking my copy of Leon McBeth, where he writes about 19th-century English Baptists:

At least four forces have helped shape Baptist concepts in ministry, in addition, of course, to such basic sources as Scripture and theology. First, because the Oxford Movement put such exaggerated emphasis upon sacerdotalism, ordination, and ministerial authority through historic successionism, Baptists tended to react to the opposite extremes. At times they almost reduced the ministry to lay status, avoided ministerial garb and titles, and eschewed formal ordination. One recalls, for example, that Charles H. Spurgeon refused any kind of ordination, claiming that a commission from God outranked any from men.
Click to expand...

— Leon McBeth, The Baptist Heritage, Broadman Press, 1987, pp 515-516

Frogman · Nov 23, 2005

As I understood it when reading of Spurgeon's call to the New Park Street Chapel, he consented to go only on a three month trial, to be renewed every quarter.

My memory may be in error on that, but I think that I remember reading that of his decision to go there was under that condition.

or something similar.

Bro. Dallas

Historical Precedence for Ordination Practices

Frogman <img src="http://www.churches.net/churches/fubc/Fr

Frogman <img src="http://www.churches.net/churches/fubc/Fr

OleSchoolBaptist New Member

rsr <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
Moderator

rlvaughn Well-Known Member
Site Supporter

Frogman <img src="http://www.churches.net/churches/fubc/Fr

Frogman <img src="http://www.churches.net/churches/fubc/Fr

rlvaughn Well-Known Member
Site Supporter

Frogman <img src="http://www.churches.net/churches/fubc/Fr

rsr <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
Moderator

Frogman <img src="http://www.churches.net/churches/fubc/Fr

canadyjd Well-Known Member

Squire Robertsson Administrator
Administrator

rsr <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
Moderator

canadyjd Well-Known Member

Frogman <img src="http://www.churches.net/churches/fubc/Fr

rsr <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
Moderator

rsr <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
Moderator

rsr <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
Moderator

Frogman <img src="http://www.churches.net/churches/fubc/Fr

Useful Searches

Historical Precedence for Ordination Practices

Frogman <img src="http://www.churches.net/churches/fubc/Fr

Frogman <img src="http://www.churches.net/churches/fubc/Fr

OleSchoolBaptist New Member

rsr <b> 7,000 posts club</b> Moderator

rlvaughn Well-Known Member Site Supporter

Frogman <img src="http://www.churches.net/churches/fubc/Fr

Frogman <img src="http://www.churches.net/churches/fubc/Fr

rlvaughn Well-Known Member Site Supporter

Frogman <img src="http://www.churches.net/churches/fubc/Fr

rsr <b> 7,000 posts club</b> Moderator

Frogman <img src="http://www.churches.net/churches/fubc/Fr

canadyjd Well-Known Member

Squire Robertsson Administrator Administrator

rsr <b> 7,000 posts club</b> Moderator

canadyjd Well-Known Member

Frogman <img src="http://www.churches.net/churches/fubc/Fr

rsr <b> 7,000 posts club</b> Moderator

rsr <b> 7,000 posts club</b> Moderator

rsr <b> 7,000 posts club</b> Moderator

Frogman <img src="http://www.churches.net/churches/fubc/Fr

rsr <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
Moderator

rlvaughn Well-Known Member
Site Supporter

rlvaughn Well-Known Member
Site Supporter

rsr <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
Moderator

Squire Robertsson Administrator
Administrator

rsr <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
Moderator

rsr <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
Moderator

rsr <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
Moderator

rsr <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
Moderator