What's in a name?

I think it is a disowning. I think a great problem in some churches is the lack of openly identifying as Baptist with clearly taught Baptist distinctives, prior to new members or converts joining.

If the faith, practice and order is clearly understood, there would be less misunderstanding, hurt feelings and possibly trouble and division among more of our local bodies.

As far as what is in a name, the simple truth is that a name should in all cases clearly and specifically identify. So, identification is certainly in a name.

I think there are basically two problems that arise from either not identifying what is believed or with that set of distinctives.

First, failure to clearly teach what is believed and practiced leads to little understanding among members and visitors.

Secondly, failure to clearly teach these distinctives makes the name 'Baptist' to no longer mean what it once did. Where the teaching is slackened, the name can begin to take on any number of meanings.

Bro. Dallas

 

I have seen several situations where other local "Baptist" churches have lost all their distinctions. So "fundamental" Baptist churches have felt that by name they are associated with churches they want nothing to do with.

They are put in the position of trying to wrestle back the true meaning or dropping the name.

Do churches drop denominational distinctives on purpose? In order to decieve? Not that I have seen, but some ecumenical types with a "whatever it takes" attitude may feel the freedom to do so.

My position would be to stick with the title I have and, if needed, teach the true distinctives and give the title backs its true meaning.

 

I am seeing a trend for churches not only to drop the "Baptist" word from their name, but also to take on a geography-embracing name that makes it sound as though they are the only authentic church in town. So what was -- fictional example -- First Baptist Church of Anytown now becomes "The Church at Anytown". So what does that suggest to the Presbyterians across the street or the Second Baptist Church on the other side of the tracks -- that they are not part of "The Church"?!

The churches that I know of which have done this have dropped the Baptist designation in part because they believe that the Baptist name, usually associated with Southern Baptists in many areas, suggests ultra-conservative values which will repel the general population.

I wonder whether there is anyone who has done a "scientific" study -- polling, etc. -- to determine whether these assumptions are correct, and, even if they are, whether changing the name overcomes that popular prejudice. Wouldn't a seeker who thinks that being Baptist is equivalent to being ignorant and manipulative feel betrayed once s/he finds out that this generic-sounding church is still actually associated with a Baptist denomination, albeit under cover?

 

You sure won't find where an "Old Regular Baptist" or "Primitive Baptist" try to hide their name Baptist. At least I haven't seen any for they hold it up high.

 

Hope you don't mind me making a comment but I had no idea that this kind of movement was happening. It saddens me to think that Baptist would be willing to drop their name of Baptist.

Thanks for the URL rsr it sure says a lot about the movement. We have churches in Michigan and we have churches in Flordia but no where near the membership spoken of in the article.

Just another sign that the end is closer than we think.

 

I add my word of thanks to rsr for the link. Wow ... what a lot of discussion there has been around this topic. Now one of the many questions arising from this trend is: if these churches remove the name "Baptist", are they continuing to have a relationship to a Baptist body? If so, are they not misrepresenting themselves to the public? And if not, by what authority did they withdraw? It may have been a congregational decision, but all too often, reading between the lines, it sounds like a pastor's sole decision. And, speaking as sometime professor of Baptist Polity, that just is not right.

As for the story about the pastor who was taking a St. Mary's Baptist Church toward "Rhema" -- I do have to sympathize, in the sense that a Baptist church had no business naming itself as if it were a Catholic or Anglican parish. "St. Mary's"?!