Two more churches have now formally left the NSW/ACT Baptist Association for not accepting a conservative view of marriage adopted by the Association. A long process of disaffiliation is now complete, and Seaforth Baptist and Avalon Peace Baptist, both in the northern beaches of Sydney, have been removed from the Baptist Association.
The “position statement” that churches and pastors in the Association need to affirm reads: “Marriage is a covenant relationship ordained by God as a lifelong faithful union of one man and one woman. Sexual intimacy outside such a marriage relationship is incompatible with God’s intention for us as his people.”
Seaforth Baptist and Avalon Peace Baptist members of the new “Open Baptists” group, alongside Hamilton Baptist Church (in Newcastle) and Canberra Baptist Church, were removed at the Baptist Annual Assembly meeting in May. Other NSW/ACT members include Tuggeranong and West Ryde. The Open Baptists also include churches outside NSW that share their ideal of liberty of opinion.
UPDATE: The Other Cheek has been given the official votes:
• The Seaforth vote: 184 for the motion to remove. 45 against.
• The Avalon vote: 207 for the motion to remove. 50 against.
“Today Seaforth Baptist was disaffiliated by the NSW/ACT Baptist Association because we do not support their statement on marriage,” Christine Redwood, lead pastor of Seaforth Baptist, posted on Facebook. “To be clear, I have long opposed having a statement on a secondary issue that can be used to disaffiliate churches and disaccredit pastors (especially when there is no position statement supporting female pastors). Below you can read Seaforth’s full response, but for now, I am thankful to belong and serve in this church. And I am thankful for the many who have been praying and supporting us as we grieve. I am also thankful for the ways the NSW/ACT Baptist Association has in the past empowered me and supported our church. After death comes resurrection.”
The Mirage News website reported an Avalon Peace Baptist press release. “We acknowledge the NSW/ACT Baptist Association decision with deep sadness,” said Dr Sally Longley, Pastor. “We respect the position of the Association regarding marriage equality, even though we think it is un-Biblical and unwelcoming and fail to understand the Association’s refusal to have a mutual respect that enables continued fellowship with us. Avalon Baptist embraces people with different views, including different views on marriage and marriage equality.”
“In this time of polarisation, furious religion, and social disgust where people feel justified in spitting out those they disagree with, we would have hoped that the Baptist Association had the Biblical depth and maturity to show a different way: that of maintaining fellowship and conversation with those with whom they differ.”
The Seaforth Statement focuses on being open to diverse stories and peoples, and it includes: the church “has opposed these motions because we are motivated by our love for God and others, and we are trying to work out what it means to be a disciple of Jesus in the culture and time we are in. Sexuality and even just relationships in general are complex and nuanced, and so for this reason as people come to us with their stories and their questions of what it means to be a disciple of Jesus, we need to wrestle as a local community on a whole range of ethical dilemmas from questions around domestic violence, divorce, adultery, pornography, celibacy, same- sex attraction, same-sex marriage, etc. Along with many other questions that sit outside sexuality, there are also complex ethical and social issues like how to be a Christian and use our money, how to be welcoming to people with disabilities, how to respond to our climate change crisis, which we also navigate. We don’t all agree on every issue, but part of what it means to participate in God’s mission is to sit with these questions, and we believe there should be freedom for local churches to have these conversations.”
Image: Seaforth Baptist Church. Image Credit: Churches Australia
Key quote from one of the excluded
“In this time of polarisation, furious religion, and social disgust where people feel justified in spitting out those they disagree with, we would have hoped that the Baptist Association had the Biblical depth and maturity to show a different way: that of maintaining fellowship and conversation with those with whom they differ.”
This view seems to turn a blind eye to Biblical principles regarding sexual morality, EG
1 Corinthians 5:11 “you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister but is sexually immoral …”
And from Ephesians 5 “But among you there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality, or of any kind of impurity … because these are improper for God’s holy people. … For of this you can be sure: No immoral, or impure … person—such a person is an idolater—has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God. Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of such things God’s wrath comes on those who are disobedient. Therefore do not be partners with them.”
In your article you mention the results of the ‘motion to remove’: who was voting on these motions (and why is there a big difference in the numbers voting)?
The baptist assembly voted on these motions. the membership of the assembly is like many other church councils or synods, made up of each lead pastor with two elected representatives from each affiliated church plus some denominational officials.
Voting details for Seaforth are incorrect in this article
184 for 45 against the motion
You are quite correct, I have now had official confirmation.
See update in the story, which shows that there was not a big difference in the numbers
I have been a Baptist by conviction since my late teens in the 1960s. I have served on committees, I editted “The Australian Baptist” magazine until it was closed down by those who wanted a parish pump sheet for the NSW Association, I was a pastor for 36 years. For nearly 15 of those years I worked part time outside that church because it couldn’t afford my stipend.
After retirement, I attended a small fellowship which was without a pastor, and shared in the preaching roster until people behind the disfellowshipping movement, who had been supporting us, closed us down without consultation.
I went up the hill to the Anglican church, because I believe a ministry is still needed where that Baptist fellowship was.
Being a Baptist has been important to me, and it is so sad to know that the Baptist denomination into which I have put so much time and effort is being dismantled, that my mother’s former church has been removed, that the church of one of my early pastors is gone, that a church I have visited in a student group is no more, that a church I have preached in has been treated like refuse.
Ichabod — the Glory has departed.
Is this dismantling and refuse treatment, or is it a protection of holy doctrine and an establishment of minimum standards? Had these churches drifted too much from Baptist and Biblical ways?
So why does this not apply: Position Statement on Local Church Autonomy and Healthy Association
Each local Baptist church is autonomous and subject to no external authority to determine its doctrine, worship, objects, and values as it has understood the scriptures to determine these matters. Nevertheless, Baptist churches usually choose to associate together to mutually discern the mind of Christ so that in a partnership of support and care based on shared convictions, objects and values, together we might more effectively engage in mission and represent Christ to the world in which we live and serve.
AS I understand it both position statements were adopted at the same meeting of the Baptist Assembly – which indicates some acceptance of a tension between the two statements.