andygoodliff

Whose Union? Which Future?

This post follows on from previous reflections here and here on the Baptist Union of Great Britain.

I came home to read my copy of the Baptist Times (which as others have reported is soon to RIP), to find that the report on Council does not appear until page 4. Surely the fact that the Baptist Union will be in debt to £1 million pounds is a front page story in a Baptist newspaper more so than government plans to cut a green fund? (Does this reflect that the paper is not such an independent voice?) When the report on Council is read it contains one obvious inaccuracy: Council is not going to reduce in size and not going to meet at weekends, at least not at the moment. In my opinion the rest of the report steers away from explaining how serious the situation is, although a short reflection from Pat Took (current BU President), on the same page, does say that she 'wondered whether [Jonathan Edwards, BU General Secretary] shielded us too much from the anxiety and distress of theose who work at Baptist House and in our Associations', who are likely to be affected as cuts will more than definitely need to be made. All in all I'm not sure this report makes clear what is at stake and the changes that may come to the shape of the Union.

I hope that this year's Baptist Assembly while wanting to look forward positively to beyond 400 years, also acknowledges and makes space that the future is very much in the air. 

I have been re-reading Ian Randall's account in The English Baptists of the 20th Century of the Denominational Consultation in the 1990s, which happened at a fairly lesiurely pace and produced big changes. There are likely to be changes as big over the next two years, but without the luxury of the same amount of time for debate and reflection. God help us.   

Some background to the current situation as I see it (I'm open to correction).

Before the re-structuring of the Union in the late 1990s following the reports Transforming Superintendency and Relating and Resourcing, Regional Ministers (or General Superintendents as they were then known) were representatives of the Union amongst the Associations they had juristriction in. Their stipend came from central funds. Now Regional Ministers, and I think all Regional Associations have more than one, (each led by a Team Leader) have their stipend funded by the Association in which they are in. This meant a power shift towards the Associations - 13 voices are each stronger than the 26 voices of the county Associations which existed before the re-structuring. Regional Ministers now represent their Association more than the Union - although this has remained a consistent sticking point and where the tension for some is concentrated - (to put it bluntly) whose pulling their strings?

More recently the last five years have seen the introduction of Trustees (see Keith Jones post on his view on this), the Senior Management Team (the heads of the various Union departments) and the Regional Team Leaders. Here is another place of tension - have these three groupings become a Council within the Baptist Union Council? I am ambigious about these developments. It partly feels a move towards a National Leadership Team, with which I am concerned because it feels unbaptist. However, I partly recognise that these groupings hold a weight of responsibility where it is helpful if they work more closely together.

Furthermore, Council has been hampered in recent years by an inertia - for example, it has struggled to agree a theology of ministry, it has struggled to explain the respective roles and tasks of the Union and Associations, it has struggled to know what to do with the position of President - each of these have had reports written by task groups which have found little result when brought to Council. Beyond Council, voices have questioned whether Council can speak for the Union. Specifically they have questioned the Apology (for Baptist involvement in slave trade) and the resolution about Women in Leadership (you can read them here). It should be also said that for many other voices (in which I number myself) these resolutions have been two high points of recent years. In my opinion both these resolutions should have been brought to Assembly for their affirmation. For too long Assembly has become a non-existent place and/or body for decision making. This has to change.

Some of the key questions that arise then are: Who leads the Union? How is power shared? In what ways does the local church, the association, the Council, the Assembly relate to one another?

In a previous post from 2009 my attempted answer to some of these questions was to explore Paul Fiddes notion of a dynamic view of authority.

King's College London looks for new OT Professor

King's College London are looking for a new Samuel Davidson Professor of Old Testament. This is welcome news and a boost to Old Testament scholarship in the UK. Previous holders of the Samuel Davidson post have been Michael Knibb, R. E. Clements (a Baptist) and Peter Ackroyd.

SWBC looking for Tutor in Biblical Studies

It continues to be all change at all South Wales Baptist College. September saw a new prinicpal, Peter Stevenson, and a new tutor in Christian doctrine, Craig Gardiner, now they are looking for a new tutor in biblical studies. This follows the news that Simon Woodman, the current tutor, is moving to a position at Bloomsbury Central Baptist Church, London.

What Lies Beyond 400?

Beyond 400 is the theme of next year's Baptist Assembly in London (it is also the title of a collection of essays from Baptist theologians and practioners from Australia). The theme took on new meaning over the last few days as the future of Baptist Union is up for grabs due to not being able to meet the current financial costs of Union life. The implications are that the 'institutional' structures will need to change, which will either see a shift more towards centralised ways of working or associational ways of workings - the weight of power, which is currently more or less shared, moving in one direction or another. There is currently a sense of inertia and frustration, which results perhaps in being bland. Neil Brighton suggests that the Union will be more based in Associations and a much reduced national resource (that is the departments of ministry, mission, finance, faith and unity and general secretariat).

I am not yet convinced that this would be the best move - we would lose too much that we would miss. I recognise that the different departments and committees are not perfect, but they resource more than any association is capable of. For example, I would fear the loss of the work we have done and are doing in areas of racial justice, women's justice and disability justice.  I am more of the opinion that if we dismantled associational structures and regional ministers were (again) employed by the Union we would be better balanced. This is partly out of belief that in many places (but I recognise not all) associational life is pretty dismal and so the regional minister is the association. If this was to be the way forward this would require a strong(er) and balanced Council and renewed Assembly that recovered its roots as an ecclesial body that help discern and hold to account the life and mission of the Union. Furthermore it would require that locally, baptist churches shake off their individualism (to borrow a phrase from the Baptist Union of Scotland) and I believe to go further and name individualism as a sin that for too long has gone unchecked amongst too many of us.

Regional ministers (and this would probably have to be a reduced number) would then seek to be agents of catholicity (a phrase I borrow from a conversation with Neil) - those who help churches relate, network and partner together, primarily still geographically (here again I disagree with Neil and so that location and place are importantly not just practically but theologically), but with some space to develop other kinds of networks, which already the national resource is doing. There would be a need for local churches to take more ownership of their wider relating together, which again is to recover something of our past. (I wonder whether our current system we have created a kind of welfare state where home mission churches depend on the centre for funding, when it might be better if local churches took more responsibility for supporting this kind of mission - I acknowledge probably not capable in all places).

There is probably a load of flaws in this suggestion, but this is to name some of the areas where the conversation will be had. There was a desire to say we remain confident and hopeful in God. I'm not sure I'm there yet (I currently feel more Jeremiah than 2nd Isaiah).

As the conversations go forward I hope this is not approached as just a structural pragmatic exercise but something that we need to reflect both theologically and historically. I was conscious that the theological voices that shaped much of the changes in the late 1990s were not there at Council - Nigel Wright, Paul Fiddes, Brian Haymes - and we have arguably not replaced them (two of them are still on Council, but where are newer voices which can help us here). The Brian Haymes festschift was called Questions of Identity and we are certainly asking question of what ties will bind us at the same time as we are been challenged to change (to echo the title both of Nigel Wright's 1991 book and his festschift) both by frustrated voices and by financial circumstances. There is a desire to be more missional with light structures, but I am uneasy about those that argue that missiology is more important than ecclesiology, whilst recognising that the other round is not helpful either. God be with us.

Are we Baptists too bland, too safe?

Ahead of next week's Baptist Union Council Neil Brighton offers the latest in a long running series of posts regarding the life and future of the Baptist Union in this country. This time its an attempt to imagine what the Union might look like, of what we might we desire it to look like, if it was formed today,

Neil offers this post at a time when there seems to be increasing disillusionment and anger towards the like of Council ('this is an unrepresentative body making decisions that goes against our being baptist' is the usual line) and also the Ministry Department (one obvious issue in particular). Having said that, this seems to rumble generally underground, we are not as publically rude as the C of E can be about its leaders.

I think there is a definite need to engage with the likes of Neil Brighton's post because it does get to the heart of some of issues in our life. I wonder when we look at the denominational landscape of UK whether we are becoming the 'bland, safe' denomination ... the Anglicans are always having verbal punch-ups about their life and future - see responses to fresh expressions - the Methodists and URC seem to be taking lots of risks and investing money into mission (some might suggest this is a sign of desperation). Amongst the Baptists we have recently seen 'Mainstream' become 'Fresh Streams' (please!!!), but in my opinion they are a largely minority voice, at least compared to the 1980s. Other marginal voices like Urban Expression and Incarnate have I believe something to offer, at least in developing and offering alternative ways of being church. I'm excited to see that Urban Expression is growing, but at the same time partnering with the likes of BMS.

Come on Baptists lets get life back in us. If you're angry at Council, turn up at Assembly and make yourself heard, but at same time make sure you know what you're talking about - there is load of misinformed Baptists about what Council is and does. This is partly the responsibility of the Union and Associations to make Council more transparent. Stop sniping on facebook and offer something contructive alongside the criticism.

John Webster releases book of sermons

I discovered today that John Webster has released a book of sermons: The Grace of Truth (Oil Lamp Books, 2011).

This follows the likes of other recent theologians Colin Gunton (Theology Through Preaching, 2001; The Theologian as Preacher, 2007), Stanley Hauerwas (The Cross-Shattered Church, 2009) and Oliver O'Donovan (The Word in Small Boats, 2010).

Children and Theology

Annemie Dillen and Didier Pollefeyt (eds.), Children's Voices: Children's Perspectives in Ethics, Theology and Religious Education (Peeters, 2010), 450pp

Timothy P. Jackson (ed.), The Best Love of the Child: Being Loved and Being Taught to Love as the First Human Right (Eerdmans, 2011), 386pp

Since the publication of The Child in Christian Thought in 2001, there has been increasing number of studies around children and theology - see my list here. The interest does not appear to be coming to an end anytime soon. As well as the two books being briefly reviewed here, there is another edited title by Marcia Bunge appearing in 2012: Children, Adults and Shared Responsibilities, and the promise of more on their way.

Children's Voices and The Best Love of the Child add two more collections of essays that explore the child. The former focuses on questions of spirituality, ethics and family. Bonnie Miller-McLemore's essay opens the book and provides a fascinating and challenging study of spirituality and its relationship to children. She is critical of faith development theory and an over emphasis on the inner spiritual life, which tends to marginalize children. Instead she argues in conversation with the likes of Jerome Berryman's Godly Play for a spirituality that is more attentive to and inclusive of children. Marcia Bunge explores the question of vocation in relation to children and parents (a similar essay can be found in The Best Love of the Child). Bunge argues for a recovery of vocation for both children and parents and sets out a number of programmatic theses towards practical theology of vocation (a larger book length treatment is in the pipeline). Other papers focus on commercialization and childhood, the idolarty of children, theological ethics from the perspective of the child (this is by John Walls who has subsequently published Ethics in the Light of Childhood), and catechism and children, amongst others. This is a broad set of essays which values children and wants to take their voice seriously. 

The Best Love of the Child brings together a number of disciplines - the book has four parts: social-psychological perspectives; historical perspectives; philosophical and theological perspectives; and legal perspectives - to argue that in all the conversation about the rights of children, that at the centre is the right to be loved and the right to be taught how to love others. The focus is largely on the home and the role of parents and in response children in being loved and taught to love. 

 

Regent's Reviews, October 2011

Latest Regent's Reviews (3.1) is now available. A feast of book reviews including

Ascension Theology by Douglas Farrow, The Future of Christian Theology of David Ford, God's Behaving Badly by Pete Ward, commentaries on Genesis 1-11, James and Matthew, Canon and Creed by Robert Jenson, Behaving in Public by Nigel Biggar, and the Blackwell Companions' to Paul and to Christian Ethics.

To read, go here.