A THEOLOGICAL RATIONALE

FOR BAPTIST ASSOCIATIONS

by Philip R. Bryan

Introduction

The Greek philosopher Heraclitus has not been the only one to recognize that life is in a constant state of flux, or change. This is especially true today in the midst of youth's rebellion against "the establishment," the status quo. One wonders if this rebellion does not involve what Sigmund Freud called an "anti-father image." Close historical examination shows that change has marked Baptist circles also. Today even, we hear from many Baptists quarters a cry for more change, a cry for us to throw off the shackles of past tradition and plot a new course for associational Baptists. Some also have even questioned the necessity or advisability of being in associated work, or even having the word "Baptist" in a church's name! Being "independent" has become their watchword. The purpose of this article is to outline briefly and roughly the thesis that the chief value of Baptist associations lies, not on a functional or pragmatic plane, but on a recognition of theological fact. In short, some type of association of churches would be needed even if its purpose was not for mutual cooperation in missionary, evangelistic, and educational work.

Question of Authority

The problem of religious authority lies back of the whole question. Answers include the following: (1) Roman Catholic view has almost unanimously maintained that religious authority has its seat in the Bible as it is interpreted by the church (i.e., the episcopacy). They argue that, since the church wrote and decided which books belong in the canon, the church has the right and responsibility to have final judgment about Christian doctrine and practice. (2) Liberal Protestantism holds the individual interpreter up as a judge of the scripture. Christ is supposedly the criterion for judging and interpreting, but the result is actually subjectivistic. (3) Baptists and evangelical Protestants maintain that the Bible is the sole rule of faith and practice. One must not forget, however, that Christ is the head of the body, that He is ultimate authority.

Paradox of Body of Christ

Paul told the Corinthians: "You are a body of Christ . . . (1 Cor. 12:27; all Biblical quotations used are my translations). He also wrote the Ephesians:
"You are fellow citizens . . . and household-members of God, Christ Jesus Himself being cornerstone, in which [or, whom] each building [i.e., each local church], as it is being joined together [i.e., the building blocks and cornerstone], grows into a holy temple in the Lord, in whom [or, which] you also are being built up together into a dwelling place of God . . . " (Eph. 2:19b-21).

Here is a paradox: each New Testament church has Christ as cornerstone; each church is a body of Christ--but each church is also the body of Christ. This means that each church is related directly to Christ (the head or cornerstone)--each church, therefore, is independent. At the same time, however, for any church to revel in the fact that she is the body of Christ is to forget that a neighboring New Testament church is also the body of Christ. No one church is the sum total of God's people. No church is in a vacuum; it is still also a body of Christ (only one among many). Paul's comments about unity and fellowship (koinonia) in the body (Eph. 4, 1 Cor. 12, Rom. 12, etc.) have relevancy here. Although Paul's remarks pertain primarily to the individual church, and although the body of Christ is not the sum total of all bodies together (i.e., a catholic or universal church), his discussion about unity in the body of Christ suggests similar emphasis on unity among various churches.

Values in Tradition

Paul often refers to "the faith" (Eph. 4:13, 1 Tim. 4:1, et al.) And "one faith" (Eph. 4:5). Jude mentions "the faith delivered once and for all to the saints" (Jude 3). In these references, faith is used in an objective sense: faith refers to what is believed, a creed or doctrinal statement. Content is emphasized. Jude uses a technical term (paradidomi) in the word "delivered." It means "to deliver tradition." Earlier Paul used similar terms in a Corinthians letter: "For I delivered [paradidomi] to you . . . what I also received [paralambano, i.e., to receive tradition] . . ." (1 Cor. 15:3a). The content of the tradition consisted of the gospel (euangelion)--the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus. The point here is that tradition was important and valuable to Paul (see 2 Thess. 2:15 and Acts 15 also). This tradition was not directly from God; it came from the Christian community Paul had joined. If even the apostle Paul accepted some tradition, can we dispose of it?

Similarly, the doctrine of Baptist perpetuity presupposes a continuity or unity between Baptist churches. No church is completely separate from the others. Historically heresies have wanted usually to pull churches away from mainstream Christianity ( 1 John 2:19). Peter wrote as a guard again false prophets "that no prophecy of scripture is of private interpretation" (1 Pet. 1:20). A doctrinal position or interpretation held solely by one individual or church is immediately suspect. Associations serve as a guard against aberrations in interpretation. The so-called "independent" church is more apt to "go off on a tangent" after some way-out interpretation.

Conclusion

Jesus Christ is head of each New Testament church. Baptist associations recognize the autonomy of each church; each is the body of Christ; He is head. They also recognize that no church is alone in the world; the Lord has always had churches, whom He has led by the Holy Spirit, throughout history. Associations, therefore, recognize the unity of the body of Christ. Remembering Jesus' warning about customs and traditions (Mark 7:3ff.), however, each generation must examine for itself its beliefs and practice. Changes do take place; even doctrinal statements have changed. Change often is a sign of progress. Change must come, however not for the sake of change; and tradition must not be discarded simply because it is tradition. To the contrary, we must respect tradition and the position of the majority. The majority view, as represented by an association of churches, may be mistaken, but it should be dismissed only after very prayerful consideration. After all, we should "earnestly contend for the faith once and for all delivered to the saints" (Jude 3).