Tuesday, July 25, 2006

 

Do We Have to Get Re-Married?


Dear Friends,

My dear wife Susan Kathleen (Jones) and I were married July 25, 1992. She was beautiful then, both inside and out, but she is 140 times as beautiful 14 years later. For Jesus to be fairer than she is, He must be fair indeed, and worthy of much worship. God has blessed us with our precious children, sustained our marriage, and blessed us in a thousand other ways. We are very thankful.

There's one problem, though, which has just occurred to me now, on our anniversary. We were not married in a Baptist church, but at Pantego Bible Church in Arlington, Texas. To make matters worse, the wedding ceremony was conducted by Dr. Elliot Johnson, who is not a Baptist minister. In fact he is (do I dare say it?) an elder in a Bible church, and a professor at Dallas Theological Seminary, which is not a Baptist seminary.

We are presently serving in a church here in the states. But what if we are ever led to apply for missionary service with the International Mission Board? Will we have to get re-married?

I ask this because last November, the IMB Board of Trustees passed a new policy indicating that if a candidate for missionary appointment had not been baptized in a Southern Baptist church, or one VERY similar, he should request “baptism” in his local Baptist church for identification with the system of beliefs held by Southern Baptists. Here is the quote:

a. Baptism is a church ordinance. Baptism must take place in a church that practices believer’s baptism by immersion alone, does not view baptism as sacramental or regenerative, and a church that embraces the doctrine of the security of the believer.
b. A candidate who has not been baptized in a Southern Baptist church or in a church which meets the standards listed above is expected to request baptism in his/her Southern Baptist church as a testimony of identification with the system of belief held by Southern Baptist churches.

In adopting this policy, the IMB BOT has created a new breed of hybrid. Their policy is two parts old Landmark ecclesiology, which states that only Baptist churches are real churches, only churches can baptize, and therefore a “baptism” ceremony performed by anyone else is not valid. Hence the need for “real” baptism before entering a Baptist church. Part a. and most of part b. of the new policy are pretty good Landmarkism. Most Southern Baptists, including this author, do not adhere to very much of the Landmark system, but at least the IMB policy is in line with someone's beliefs.

The third part, though, would be disavowed by good Landmark Baptists, and in fact by well-studied Baptists of every stripe. It conveys the idea that the missionary candidate has already been baptized for the biblical reason---to identify with the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ--- but now must be “baptized” again for another reason, to demonstrate that he believes what Southern Baptists believe. If that third part is not derived from Landmarkism, what is its origin? Sadly, it comes from the kind of careless, ignorant ecclesiology that has become all too common of late in our churches. The idea that the person who has already been baptized must be “baptized” again, or, as is commonly said, “re-baptized” to state his denominational affiliation is common among the uninitiated in our churches, but is to be found nowhere in the Bible, certainly, nor anywhere in serious theological scholarship.

(Pardon me a moment---cough, cough, cough---every time I hear the nonsense word “re-baptized” I begin to choke, cough, sneeze, wheeze, and hyperventilate all at the same time. Please give me a moment, and a paper bag. No, not a Wal-mart bag, son! Okay, thanks. Ah, that’s better.)

In all of the hubbub over abstinence from alcohol, church discipline, Calvinism, election of officers, requirements for church membership, and other matters that have consumed the Southern Baptist denomination over the past few weeks, we seem to have lost sight of what started the whole thing---it’s about Baptism!

We are Baptists! We know that baptism is one thing, and one thing only: Baptism is an act of obedience whereby the believer identifies with Jesus Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection. Sure, more can be said about its significance, but that is the bottom line. Do not try to tell us that baptism is a ceremony that means whatever we say it means. Do not try to use baptism as a denominational loyalty pledge. God chose baptism precisely because it is a powerful picture of the heart of the Gospel. The believer is lowered into the water, as Jesus was lowered from the cross and into the tomb. The believer is then raised from the water, as Jesus was raised from the tomb to life! If the IMB BOT wants us to cheapen that God-given ordinance into something we do to identify ourselves as loyal Southern Baptists, they have another thing coming.

Susan and I do not intend to be re-married. We have already been married. We are already married.

Neither do I intend to be “re-baptized” (cough, cough, cough) for any reason, least of all to show that I am a good Southern Baptist.

The IMB BOT’s ridiculous policy must be repealed, and the trustees will see no end of opposition from well-versed Baptists until it is repealed.

Love in Christ,

Jeff

Comments:
Right on, brother.

I've asked some folks where in the Bible it says that immersion "identifies" us with Jesus. No one has answered yet. Do you know?

Some say it's our public profession of faith. Wouldn't that be when we state we've been saved by the blood of Jesus? God didn't say to confess with our baptistry, did He?

Ah well ... you gave this a lot of thought, I take it. Good for you. And I agree.

If we ever bump into each other again, I'll buy you a cup at Starbucks, since you ... well ... never mind.
 
Good post,

Interesting parallel!
 
Also,

We were married in a dually aligned church. Does that mean we have to get remarried too?
 
Kevin:

Might that mean you have to get half a divorce?
 
Bob,

Unfortunately the pastor who married us was very well known and got a divorce a few years ago and now works for one of those Church fund raising companies. But we just celebrated 18 years!
 
Dear Bob and Kevin,

You guys are great to come around and check out this article. Thanks for your interest and friendship.

Love in Christ,

Jeff
 
SAY WHAT,
We just became members of your church this past week.

And now We find out that you and Susan, who have 8 beautiful gifts (Blessings) from GOD are not married!!!

Susan must have been very, very, very Young when she: I DO…

I think we should revisit the Church in town that has a Woman Pastor. LOL

Brother Jeff, the 2 SERMONS you preached to the GLORY OF GOD on Sunday were the Most Right On, and as I shared They Don't get any Better.

HAPPY AMMIVERSARY see you tonight…

Wayne and Irene
LOVE Your Brother and Sister in CHRIST.
 
Actually, while she may have been young before she said "I do," she was certainly Young afterwards, right?

;-)
 
Jeff:

I've come to the conclusion that all these differences and rules and restrictions and what all are irrelevant. What counts in Christianity is what you believe. Where your faith is.

When you go into His service, that faith manifests itself in what you do and what you teach. So they are equally important.

What someone else believes, even if it's the IMB, or the BoT, is irrelevant to you. You need to do what you need to do, and God will handle the external stuff.

Now .. when you become involved in the larger picture, you have a responsibility to God to act in accordance with your faith. But God still controls that. And He does what He wants to do, with what you do.

How else could we be free in our faith?

I love the arguing back and forth. People defending what they believe. The average Joe in the church seldom ever has to do that. Just live 6 days a week and show up at church and you'll never have to take a stand, or explain why you believe what you do, or defend your beliefs against someone who has a better argument.

If we're involved in all this, we're the lucky ones (to paraphrase John Calvin). It's just sad that folks like Bobby Welch can't see that.
 
Interesting paralell between marriage and baptism.

One of the reasons this particular issue is of importance to us is that our own daughter (under current approved IMB BOT rules) would have to be re-baptized if someday she were to decide to be a missionary and go with the IMB.

Our daughter was baptized in an estero (branch of the sea that makes its way inland) along with several others from a couple of different house churches. She wasn't baptized into the membership of either one of the house churches, but simply in obedience to Christ's command and her profession of faith in Christ Jesus. Since my folks were down for a visit at the time, my dad baptized her. Hopefully she still has a few more years before looking to be appointed. Maybe by then the rule will be changed.
 
Dear Friends,

Strange you should mention Susan's age. I thought, when we married, that she was 23. But every year she seems to remember it differently, and the number keeps getting lower. Now, on our 14th anniversary, she seems to recall having been only 15. I wonder if by the time we have our 50th, she might claim we married the year before she was born??!!

Bob,

I agree that this controversy over baptism is distracting. BUT, much pain for Average Joe is inevitable when we don't run a tight ship. Have you read Mrs. Cherry's blog on this subject?

Love in Christ,

JRY
 
Jeff:

Sure have. But I think in these end times, God is driving the church .. the people .. toward what the church is supposed to be. Believers who have a personal relationship .. a personal acquaintance .. with Jesus.

We get all encamped in our doctrinal stuff, and God is saying here's your roadsign to tell whether you're focused on the Savior .. do you have unity? Do you live at peace with each other?

I think it's all preparation of the Body of Christ, for the marriage celebration. I couldn't be happier about it all.
 
Jeff:

A followup thought: what if the current goings-on (controversy, change, etc) is EXACTLY what God has in mind?

You mentioned "much pain for the average Joe". I understand that thought. But if my hunch is correct, God is in the process of sorting folks out and it's time to get serious. I personally don't think He wants any "average" folks any more.

When we're 100% focused on, and trusting in, God (in all His manifestations) then the hiccoughs of doctrinal disputes and baptisms and wine with dinner lose their power. They simply become our positions or other people's positions, and other people's positions don't bother us.

Pain for the average folks will either drive them to the Father, or drive them away. Perhaps that's what God has in mind, for all of us.

Like I said, I'm thrilled about all this.
 
Great parallel, Jeff. Thanks for reminding us that the Baptism guideline is still on the books.

Blessings on your family at the happy time.
 
My dear Bishop Young,
Thank you for your timely post. This is the week I am going to be working on Article VII of the BF&M2000 for my Sunday-school class. I especially appreciate your pointing out the Landmark issue. I think it is bigger than most of us realize. I can remember as a youth hearing this stuff about Baptists having "a trail of blood" going all the way back to John the Baptist, but I didn't realize what was going on. There are still many of those kind in SB churches today. They've never even heard of Landmarkism, but that is what they are.
Have you read Gene Bridges book on Landmarkism? I haven't made my way through it all, but what I have read is quite interesting.
You are doing a fine job. Keep up the good work.
Wayne Hatcher
 
Dear Brother Guy,

For the sake of all Baptists who have been baptized (by immersion) in good conscience, but not in a Southern Baptist church, I certainly do hope we can get that IMB policy changed. I wonder what percentage of MKs have experienced some variety of baptist that would not pass the new IMB policy?

Dear Brother Wayne,

Thanks for visiting, and for the encouraging word. I agree that Landmarkism lives in SB churches, even where that term is not known.

Dear Brother Wayne,

Having you as a supporter has been a great help to my attitude in ministry. I thank God for you.

Dear Brother Wes,

Whatever!

Dear Brother Art,

Yes, the policy is still on the books. We dare not lose sight of that. That's what started this whole movement.

Love in Christ,

Jeff
 
Jeff,
I really, really appreciate this post. Well done! What you would feel if someone demanded your remarriage is what some churches (and now our IMB) have made many people feel regarding their biblically valid baptism. The SBC has rejected Landmarkism in the past, and I pray we will do so again. And I pray the Lord straightens us (the SBC) out regarding what baptism really is.

Contrary to the rhetoric of the anti-bloggers, I believe the Lord is using these Baptist blogs to help us and bless us.

Thank you for contributing to this important discussion.
 
Jeff,

What a clever way of bringing the baptism issue back into the discussion. Your example about your wedding illustrates the point so clearly, even a trustee should be able to get it! ;)

**********

Guy,

I'd hate to be a trustee trying to explain why your daughter's baptism would be unacceptable.
 
Great post. Especially since I was saved and baptized in a non-SBC church. I'm now an SBC pastor!

Am I disqualified to be an SBC pastor?
 
Dear Brother Steve,

Good point about needing to reject Landmarkism again.

Dear Brother Tim,

Yes, the issue of baptism in the no-longer-new IMB policy must be kept on the front burner.

Dear Brother Christopher,

I guess you can call yourself a pastor, and your church can consider you their pastor, but you're not really one. Sorry to have to break it to you! :) Also, anyone you might have baptized, especially those who then might have baptized someone else, will have to be contacted and informed that they have not been baptized. Have them all report to my church---I'll take the baptisms for my Annual Church Profile numbers!

Love in Christ,

Jeff
 
One what ground is immersion in water about joining, or "aligning" with a local church and its beliefs?

Baptism is about identifying with Jesus by renacting his death, burial, and resurrection. Water baptism does not put you into the church, (universal or local) but faith in Christ does.

I have news for some of these pastors, some of the downright meanest people I have ever met had been baptised and were members of local churches. You can baptise a devil of a person!!

By taking the position some of the leading Southern Baptists have, you are not completely unlike many Restorationist churches who believe that baptism is the mechanical trigger into the kingdom of God. The only difference is that you are substituting the local church for the kindgom. By the way, both are wrong.

Come to think of it, where in the Bible is "joining a church" or "church membership" discussed? I am not implying that either is wrong, just curious were some are coming from.

"For by one Spirit are we all baptised into one body.." That is the baptism you want to be sure of, and we don't have a part in it other than to reap it's benefits as members of Christ's body.

Grace and Peace
Royce Ogle
 
enjoy your stuff
 
Dear Brother Royce,

I hope you understand my position on this, but I'm not sure you do.

Baptism is about obedience to Christ, not about church membership. BUT, before someone can join with a local church, he must demonstrate obedience to Christ in baptism.

Dear Anonymous,

Thanks for the encouraging word.

Love in Christ,

Jeff
 
Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]





<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Subscribe to Posts [Atom]