Wednesday, September 29, 2010
One-Church Schools
This is a question that I have had quite some time. It seems that since about the 1930s the ABA has almost made a stand on the idea of one church-sponsored seminaries. Can anyone tell me what the difference is between having a seminary, such as BMATS or Jacksonville College, which is owned by all the churches of the BMA of America, and our publishing and bookstore ministries (Baptist Sunday School Committee) owned by all the churches of the ABA?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
We could hem and haw about minor differences, but at the end of the day, I am not sure that there is a real difference. On that note, I don't think it is necessarily a bad idea for associations to own publishing and bookstore ministries, or even schools for that matter. If we are going to have associations (which are permissible under the scriptures), then should not those associations provide services to the churches that oversee them?
ReplyDeleteWhat I mean is that if the association is a cooperation of churches doing together what they could not do by themselves, then what is the violation of allowing an association to own a bookstore (to supply churches with literature), a publishing house (for curriculum and periodicals) or even a college or seminary (to train ministers and Christian workers)?
Some will argue that colleges and seminaries need to be owned by a single church so that they remain doctrinally pure. Yet, the One-Church school system has not prevented the GAP, racial segregation (in modern times), or new-lightism from being taught in our seminaries.
Others will argue that by having the association own schools or publishing houses, church autonomy can be violated. However, just like with the one-church school system, if a school teaches something a local church opposes, they can choose to not support that school. The same works with the bookstore and publishing house, and the BSSC.
Still, others argue that the whole idea of an association is unscriptural, or that the idea of an association owning anything is unscriptural. Associations are scriptural. (Jerusalem council). As for associations owning anything, the Bible neither confirms it, nor condemns it. The churches of Acts weren't as corporately minded (meaning, they didn't go about dreaming up new programs to start) as our churches in America are. This is due to the persecution and culture of the day more than anything.
One might say that seminaries and publishing houses ought not to be necessary, because the churches of the Lord should be edifying the saints for the ministry of the Gospel. I would be inclined to agree. Our mission should be discipling others and soul winning, not building a massive organization where administrative costs eat up a majority of the resources (and I am not being critical of the BSSC. I have no idea of the finances of the publishing house and bookstore, and so on. I do know that administrative costs are burdening other Baptist associations).
So basically, by answer is that there is no difference, and there is no violation either.
The standard line about 30 years ago was that the seminary was fulfilling the teaching part of the commission and that the commission was given to the local church.
ReplyDeleteI don't buy it. Associational ownership is associational ownership, whether seminaries, book stores or summer camps.
Or funds, or ministries, or missions, or meeting times, or meeting places. Here's a question.
ReplyDeleteIf God wants to make sure a true church gives authority to start another true church (landmarkism tenat 1), then if 15 churches give authority at the same time as "co-sponsors", then doesn't the new church still have at least 1 sponsoring hand of authority? Isn't that the big issue here? Has churches partnering ever caused problems?
Another Question: Since the churches were to take up funds at the first part of each week to send to Jerusalem, and pool it together into a fund for Paul to be ready to receive when he came... then wouldn't that be a group fund or associational fund? And since they all decided to send to the same place, didn't they technically own the fund together as an association and decide where the funds went?
Finally, know this. MANY MANY MANY Baptist churches of today (non-SBC) including ABA, BMA, and Independent Baptist churches (which left these associations) started by associations voting to sponsor them.
Wouldn't the "politics" of an ABA sanctioned seminary be astronomical? I can hear it now, "Bruther Moderator, hummm (clearing throat), I would like to say a few words (which really means I'm about to talk for a long time) about what has been going on at our seminary..."
ReplyDeleteDon't we have that type of politicization now? It may not be said from the messenger floor, but I have watched over the past two or three years as Texas Baptist Institute (sponsored by Calvary BC of Henderson, not association owned) has been assailed by brethren, some of which attend or have attended other ABA schools, and some that left for non-ABA schools.
ReplyDelete::throws up his LMBIS sign:: LMBIS 4 LIFE!
ReplyDeleteMaybe not all charges leveled against TBI in the past have been legitimate, but it is well-testified fact that TBI has advocated for modern translations such as NIV or NASV and her leaders ridicule others who hold to the position that the KJV is the Word of God.
ReplyDelete