The Uniqueness of Our Baptist Faith (part 2)

Last issue, I discussed the first four distinctives of the Baptist faith. Baptists believe in the biblical authority as the basis of belief and behavior. In contrast to the Romanists’ dependence on church authority and tradition, the former highly regarded what the Bible says, so that the former even paid much for this view with blood that remain unretributed to this day. We also believe in the autonomy of the local church. Hence, our local churches do not form a centralized authority to which each church submits. We also believe in the priesthood of every believer. This doctrine serves as an unusual teaching during the pre-reformation period in which the established Romanists church controls everything even the destiny of every soul. Finally, I discussed the fourth distinctive – the two church ordinances namely baptism by immersion and the Lord’s Supper. Both are for the saved people already.

In this issue, I will discuss the remaining four distinctives that make the Baptist faith a unique one until other Christian groups found out these teachings’ closeness to the holy Scriptures. These are individual soul liberty, salvation by grace through faith, the two officers in the church, and the separation of church and state. I pray that these distinctives will equip you to know your Christian Baptist heritage and to overcome the devil’s temptation to sell out the faith for material reasons or for another faith.

Baptists believe in the doctrine of individual soul liberty. Through the centuries even prior to the reformation period, this Christian people group were severely persecuted by the false established church. During and after the reformation period, the Baptists were persecuted by the Protestants. Though it was done for mixed motives such as political and religious, but they were always opposed for their being uncooperative with the society demands pertaining to religious matters. In Romans 14:5,12 Paul taught that every Christian can follow something their conscience tells them so especially in matters where the Scripture is unclear or allows us to do so. Some favor recognition or observance of a certain day over another. This must be respected. Unfortunately, some Christian groups today prohibit the observance of birthday, of death anniversary, and of Christmas. The celebration and observance connected with these days is not wrong. Consider the godly reasons for observance of these days! What may be ungodly is the expenses incurred for the celebration or neglect of church attendance that keeps the Christian from giving his tithes and offerings for missions and the church needs!

Baptists believe in salvation by grace through faith. We anchor this teaching on the following passages, namely; Ephesians 2:8-9; Romans 3:24; Ephesians 2:5; Titus 2:11; 3:4-7. Though we are not alone in this belief, yet we maintained this clear doctrine through the centuries both before and after the reformation period. Baptists teach and preach this doctrine tenaciously knowing that man needs salvation. However, some of our comrades have a tendency to water down this truth in favor of greater statistical “converts” being brought into the church. This we must strongly reject as it will result to a mixed congregation inside the local church. We must be warned with what happened in the first four centuries of Bible Christianity in which people with doubtful conversion were accepted. For as in the past, we too could reap the negative results inside our local church. Soul winners, Sunday school teachers, Deacons, and Pastors must be careful in examining the conversion testimony of every membership candidate. Let us carry this truth as we go and visit every home and speak to every soul about their need of Christ. Let us teach this in every Sunday school classroom. Let us preach this at the pulpit. Remember it is the Lord who saves, brings people to church, and adds them into the local church (Acts 2:41-47).

Baptists believe in two church officers. We accept only two main offices in the local church, namely; the office of the Pastor (Senior Pastor if there are two or more pastors in the church). This is taught in 1 Tim 3:1-7 and Titus 1:5-7 (bishop); in Acts 20:28 (overseer); and in 1 Peter 5:1-4 (elder). The Pastor rules the local church in all its phases of ministry. The second is the office of the deacon. The number of Deacons is not prescribed. Hence, the local congregation has the prerogative to determine. This is clearly taught in 1Tim 3:8-12. These men must be called “Deacon”. They were chosen to assist the Pastor in the discharge of his administrative function in the local church. They are not in authority over the Pastor to check his job. They are chosen according to the qualities mentioned in Acts 6:1-7 in addition to what was stated already. Conflicts come when these two officers do not fully understand their respective tasks and fail to maintain harmony. Since the Pastor must be in full time engagement, the deacons must always look into the Pastor’s condition and needs including that of his family so as to free him from possible worries in his domestic affairs. A godly Pastor must also lead his deacons towards full potential and sound harmony with one another. Any trouble in this level will bring the church down and fail to fulfill her desired goals.

Baptists believe in the separation of church and state. There are four passages on which this doctrine is anchored. First, in Matthew 22:15-22 in which Christ recognized the state‘s authority to exact taxes upon its subjects as well as the validity of religious financial obligations to its respective local churches. However, in this modern day we see increasing state intervention in the affairs of the local church. Let me enumerate them. One, the state unjustly obligates religious institutions to pay taxes (withholding) from the income earned of their investment; they provide exemptions that only discourage honesty and strengthen bureaucratic evil practices; Second, the state does not have clear-cut policies on how to treat the income of religious ministers and workers even if they are positively contributing to the moral development of society yet remained unrecognized and unfairly rewarded. Second passage is John 18:28-40 in which Pilate himself recognized the authority of religious courts over the civil courts. Unfortunately, in this democratic state we only recognize the religious courts of Islamic faith while the Christian or Baptists’ faith are placed in the sidelines. Perhaps the issue of fear and consistency are crucial in this provision.

Third, in Romans 13:1-7 the Baptist faith espouses the view that we must submit to the civil authority regardless of its wickedness, unfairness, and injustices. We believe we are not to launch a movement that will unseat the elected and appointed authorities. Although, this submission principle is not absolute, Baptist churches must unite to put up a strong defense against this national prostitution perpetrated by religious groups identified below. We strongly reject the EDSA 1-3, the military coups, the military mutiny, and other forms of rebellions. Our comrades both in the pew and in the pulpit only sit down and watch them dominate the media airwaves and the streets. Thus, events of this sort develop a rebellious attitude among our people. In all these, the Romanists, the liberals and some ignorant evangelical Protestants, as well as the group of Eddie Villanueva have been behind or participatory to these events. I deplore such evil and unscriptural national behavior started by military officers who reached the Palace, the Senate, and other high government offices. Almost all of these were members of above churches that continue to divide and demonize the nation. What have we done, Baptists comrades? Have we preached against this wickedness or are we like dogs that are unable to bark against the perpetrators?

Fourth, in Acts 5:17-29, the Baptist churches are biblically authorized to engage in civil disobedience to state impositions, demands, and legislations when our cherished doctrines and morals are violated or promoted to be transgressed by the larger society. Our early Christian ancestors in the first few centuries espoused this view. Likewise our Baptist forefathers practiced this through those Christian groups named after their human leaders; then the Anabaptists predecessors of Baptists. We are not historical and biblical Baptists if we are not imitating this lineage. Thus, are we just to sit down and watch the nation and its leaders legislate laws and enforce them that are unBaptistic from the start? Should we not encourage our own people to strengthen the few to organize and to put up a fortress of apologetic defense against this Romanist, ecumenical, and socialist attacks against the Baptist faith? There is hardly a true voice on our defense in many governmental agencies especially in the law making body. Our existing “conferences” do not address the issues of the day affecting the lay people. So they are left to fend for themselves when the evil attacks them from all fronts. Christian schools are forced to compromise with the statutory requirement for recognition and or accreditation for survival reasons even if they operate clandestinely. Agencies are dominated by Romanists who have no biblical morality and by the non-Romanists who have agreed with the existing norms of the agency for job security and avoidance of ostracism. We must ensure our biblical morality is intertwined to every aspect of human endeavor strengthened by creating institutions managed by godly men and women of God. Amen!

Cults and False World Views

Recently, Pope Benedict XVI approved a change on the Roman Catholic tradition about Limbo-” a place of happiness” somewhere out there between heaven and hell where the souls of unbaptized children go when they die. Limbo is not an officially published dogma of the RCC but a hope based on God's mercy which invites us to pray for there salvation, and Jesus' tenderness toward children that their is a way of salvation for children who died without baptism(MacCarthy 1995, 26-27 ; CBCP 1994, 1261). According to a Catholic theologian, Thomas Aquinas, they do not suffer the pains and deprivation of hell, but neither do they enjoy the benefits of the blessedness of heaven (Erickson 1995, 1092). For centuries the RCC holds that infants are “Born with a fallen human nature and tainted by original sin... have need of the new birth in Baptism to be freed from the power of darkness and brought into the realm of the freedom of the children of God...”(CBCP 1994, 1250). However, the Vatican chose a new better hope that “children who die without being baptized can (now) go to heaven.”


The theological modification is not derived for clearer scriptural convictions but because of the “pressing pastoral needs.” How can those infants born to “non-believers” (non-Catholics) including the innumerable abortions, stillbirths, and miscarriages get to heaven? Certainty it is not achieved since the Scripture they said is “ largely silent on the matter.” Where there is no fixed ground of belief, changes and philosophical speculations are always welcome. This is the old historical trend of the RCC.


Further, the new teaching is not to encourage Catholics not to baptize their children anymore but to comfort parents who failed to baptize their children before death. But do we really need to worry about the souls dead infants? We will answer this without going through the subject of baptism.


Children are born with a sinful nature (Psa 51:5; Rom. 5:12-14). But they are neither lost nor condemned before reaching the age of responsibility. The child is still innocent and incapable of making genuine moral decisions. They are not yet able to reject Christ. In fact, Jesus made them an example of true and simple faith that leads to salvation (Matt 18:3-5; 19:14). If children are condemned, David would not have rejoiced with the assurance that someday he shall see his child that died-2 Sam 12:19-23(Erickson, 1994).


The new teaching of the RCC, though not Biblical, is designed to meet the needs of humanity. Albeit, even if there are some theological issues that are not so clearly revealed in the Bible, we should not be engrossed in formulating new beliefs that are given to change because they can't be found in the Scriptures but are merely conjectures. Nor should we adopt teachings because they are convenient to the conscience, but denying the unsatisfied needs of our church and society. Our main duty is to act by the clear teachings and commandments of the Bible while discovering and implementing Biblical systems and structures to help the needy within and outside the local church.


References:
Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines (CBCP). 1994. Cathechism of The Catholic Church. Manila: ECCCE and Word of Life Publications.
McCarthy, James. 1995. The Gospel According to Rome. Oregon: Harvest House Publishers.
Erickson, Millard. 1995. Christian Theology. Manila: Christian Growth Ministry (CGM).