Martin Sutherland is one of our Baptist Theologians, previously being a lecturer at Carey Baptist College. He is currently Senior Pastor at Avonhead Baptist Church in Christchurch. In this article he speaks into concerns about Baptist ecclesiology and the proposed Serious Misconduct Policy that has recently been through a consultation process.
Any proposal with implications for local church management raises concerns as to a possible weakening of the Baptist view of the local church. This is especially the case when there are implications for pastors and other leaders.
New Zealand Baptists stand in the British Baptist tradition. This is a rich legacy which cannot be reduced to one characteristic in isolation. Two aspects of that heritage are pertinent.
I. British Baptists organised precisely at a time when a key ecclesiastical concern was that ministers chosen by an outside body or individual could be foisted on a local congregation (as was the case in the Stuart Restoration from 1662). This was less an assertion of independence than a rejection of coercion in spiritual matters.
II. At the same time, these Baptists were at considerable pains to distinguish themselves from continental Anabaptists whom they considered heretical. In particular, this meant British Baptists acknowledged the role of civil authority, which Anabaptists had rejected. Baptist churches reserved the right to self-governance in spiritual matters but accepted that they were required under God, via civil authorities, to be good citizens.
For New Zealand Baptists, who stand in this tradition, autonomy has never meant hard-shell independence. From the beginning of European settlement, local churches have sought accountability and support from others with Baptist principles. Initially informal and relational, this connection became formalised as soon as was practicable. In some places this might mean a “mother church” relationship (such as in Auckland or Dunedin) or a formal Association (as in Canterbury from 1874), with the formation of the colony-wide Union in 1882.
The collaborative advantage of the Union structure has been most obvious in meeting that key Baptist distinctive of citizenship. The incorporation of the Union in 1923 was precisely for that purpose, as it enabled the churches to meet property law requirements. New Zealand Baptists’ involvement in the Marriage Act has been similarly served by the existence of the Union.
The proposed process for dealing with issues of serious misconduct undoubtedly adds a new layer of cooperation. However, it does not undermine the responsibility of the congregation to determine its own leadership. Leaders are not imposed on a congregation. Certainly, there might be an outcome by which the expectation is that a current leader is stood down. That is a question of shared standards. Even here, the way forward lies ultimately with the local congregation, though a refusal to take the counsel of other Baptists could lead to the withdrawal of that vital cooperation and fellowship.
More pointedly, though details and processes will be continuously revised, an arrangement such as this is essential if we New Zealand Baptists are to meet our responsibilities as citizens. To our shame, civil authorities are sometimes ahead of the church in matters of justice. We have accepted that we must manage our property according to the law. There is no threat to the Gospel in managing safety and rates like good citizens. Jesus himself condemned leadership which was abusive and self-serving. We have proved tardy in addressing such breaches of the Gospel model. Civil society is ahead of us here.
The proposals redefine aspects of local responsibility, but do not threaten it on any fundamental questions. This is not an abandonment of sacred principles, but a chance to fulfil them in the light. The call is to move from defensiveness to humility. It should be welcomed.
Sutherland Lecture recording, National Hui 2023:
Kept apart by creeds: The 1923 Act of Incorporation in the context of division
You can listen to Martin Sutherland’s lecture from Baptist National Hui last year. He explores what divides us and why we’re still together. Asking those ‘Big Bite’ questions about how we handle difference and reflecting on the Act of Incorporation and what that means in our constitutional basis all comes into this story. Listen on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, YouTube, or the Baptist app and website.
Photo: blurred image of adult and child – Baptist NZ
