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.

Comments

[ian Tutton (Revd Dr) - Minister @ Hampstead Garden Suburb Free Church, London NW11]

I don't know anything of the proposals, they haven't trickled down to the local church/minister yet, at least where I am. However, I would offer the following; the most precious resource that is available to the Baptist family is its cohort of ministers, and any changes need to ensure that the welfare, development and continuing formation of ministers is a top priority. There are too many regional ministers, but precisely because there are so many, they distort the way in which the Union as a whole, and in particular its ministers are able to influence its future direction. The Baptist Ministers' Fellowship needs to become far more vocal, active and influential on behalf of its member ministers, otherwise we risk disaffecting many. Rather than larger churches, and one presumes their minister(s) assuming responsibility for smaller churches, why have so many churches?

[CHSpurgeon]

@Andy - Thanks for the post but are we in danger of over complicating matters? Surely BUGB first needs competent management in addition to transparent, inclusive and effective governance?

[Andy Goodliff]

Thanks CH, great to hear a voice from the past ... what do you mean by competent management? what does that look like?

[CHSpurgeon]

@Andy - By competent management I mean, for example, that there needs to be a clear business plan, a clear long term financial strategy, a clear and accountable senior management structure etc. These are really very basic things that BUGB should have long had in place. I do think there has to be room for new talent and expertise within BUGB, both in senior management and on the board of trustees.

I do think BUGB needs to have an open and frank discussion about ecclesiology, particularly relecting upon its relationship with the local church. This conversation needs to extend far beyond the set piece events of the Council and the Assembly. However, we must not build our entire Baptist ecclesiology around the need for the central association to develop a medium term deficit reduction plan. That really would be a downgrade!