Questions About North Carolina CBF's Proposed Foundational Statements

A reporter who is working on an article for a Christian Magazine sent me a list of questions about CBF North Carolina's proposed revisions to its foundational statements and asked for my response. Below are the questions and my responses. I'll post a link to the reporter's story when it becomes available.

1. What are the key issues / questions involved in this proposal?

In my opinion, the key issue being addressed by CBFNC’s new foundational statements is the issue of authority. It is yet another example of a post-modern legitimacy crisis – this time working itself out within the moderate Baptist movement.

Like the fundamentalists in the SBC, communitarians within CBF are primarily concerned to set “parameters” for the interpretation of scripture.

Would the proposed statement take the CBF in North Carolina in a more creedal direction?

Yes. The inclusion of the Apostle’s Creed within the foundational statements makes that obvious. Until 2000, all Baptists offered "confessions of faith" instead of creeds. “Creeds” are considered binding upon the consciences of those within a communion . “Confessions” are considered a consensus of the beliefs of the community at a moment in time, -- and not binding upon the consciences of those within the communion.

Until 2000, all Baptists were greatly concerned to protect the liberty of each person’s conscience. Conscience was understood as the heart and soul of an individual -– the depths of being from which a person answers the summons to relationship with God and responds to the guidance of the Holy Spirit in his/her daily life.

In 2000 SBC fundamentalists eliminated liberty of conscience from the Baptist Faith and Message (BFM) statement. They also elevated the Bible over Jesus and codified a narrow range of approved “parameters” for interpreting scripture. Then they made this binding upon all employees of the convention –- terminating missionaries and professors who refused to sign it.

Now in 2010 CBF communitarians in North Carolina are proposing to eliminate liberty of conscience (i.e., Priesthood of the Believer) from their statement of beliefs. CBF communitarians do not exalt the Bible over Jesus and they remain open to a broader range of interpretations of scripture. Their efforts to enforce uniformity of interpretation have a lighter touch than fundamentalists. Nevertheless, their emphasis on community is designed to set parameters on liberty of conscience within moderate Baptist life.

2. It seems that the tension of holding to denominational distinctives vs. modernizing them is at play here, along with questions over the best way to interpret Scripture (individual vs. collective wisdom; priesthood of all believers vs. creeds, etc.). Would you agree with that assessment?

No. I do not view this as an attempt to modernize Baptist beliefs. Liberty of conscience is basic to Baptist beliefs. To eliminate it is to make us indistinguishable from other mainline Christian denominations.

For evidence, just look at the emphasis on “community” that is prevalent in the creeds, confessions and rhetoric of all the other mainline denominations. Then look for any evidence of “liberty of conscience” in their creeds, confessions and rhetoric.

3. Is it accurate to say that the proposed new statement would include creeds?

Yes. See answer to question # 1.

remove soul competency?

Yes. The phrases “priesthood of the believer” and the phrase “soul competency” are often used synonymously with the traditional Baptist emphasis on “liberty of conscience.” In one way or another, each phrase is based on the personal and individual nature of the “born again” salvation experience. Baptists become Christians one-at-a-time as each believer responds personally to the gospel. Baptism -- the rite that symbolizes the individual’s entry into the community of faith -- follows the individual’s personal response to the gospel and a profession of faith. Baptists relate to God personally -– without clergy, priests, saints, etc. serving as mediators between them and God.

North Carolina CBF’s original founding documents summarize the traditional Baptist emphasis on the individual and on liberty of conscience under the heading of the “Priesthood of All Believers:”

We affirm the freedom and right of every Christian to interpret and apply scripture under the leadership of the Holy Spirit. We affirm the freedom and responsibility of every person to relate directly to God without the imposition of creed, the control of clergy or the interference of government.

The proposed revision of these documents deletes the emphasis on the individual and on liberty of conscience. These are replaced with an emphasis on the priority and authority of the community:

3. We confess that the Christian faith is best understood and experienced within the community of God’s people who are called to be priests to one another.

and diminish church autonomy?

Yes and No. Article four preserves church autonomy:

4. We confess that under the Lordship of Christ each congregation is free and responsible to discern the mind of Christ and to order its common life accordingly.

Article five could present a threat to the continued autonomy of the congregation if the church chooses to surrender its autonomy as it seeks unity with others:

5. We confess that through the Holy Spirit we experience interdependence with other believers and congregations who follow Christ, and we seek the unity of the church for which he prayed.

Autonomous churches are free to use their autonomy to surrender their autonomy.

4. How significant is this discussion in CBF circles beyond North Carolina?

Beyond North Carolina, I am not aware of much formal discussion about this. The influence of communitarians has been increasing in CBF circles over the past decade. I suspect that it will spread more rapidly if North Carolina adopts the new statement.

5. Any other comments or insight?

See my recent essay about this on Ethics Daily.