Churches drop 'Baptist' name, not principles

  • Thread starter Thread starter RLT
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
How funny! My friend’s church did EXACTLY the same thing a few years ago - they dropped ‘Baptist’ from their name because it was scaring people off…but their beliefs stayed the same!
 
40.png
Elzee:
How funny! My friend’s church did EXACTLY the same thing a few years ago - they dropped ‘Baptist’ from their name because it was scaring people off…but their beliefs stayed the same!
Click to expand...
What’s not so funny is Catholic parishes calling themselves “faith communities” instead of plain old Catholic parishes or churches and for the very same reason. PCsim gone amok, once again!
 
Della said:
What’s not so funny is Catholic parishes calling themselves “faith communities” instead of plain old Catholic parishes or churches and for the very same reason. PCsim gone amok, once again!
Click to expand...
Excellent comparison. You’re absolutely right.
 
Hmmmm, sounds like they are trying to deny who they are. If your Baptist then why hide the name? It sounds like they are already on the road to changing their doctrines. After all they have already changed their worship music and how the sermons are presented.
 
Della said:
What’s not so funny is Catholic parishes calling themselves “faith communities” instead of plain old Catholic parishes or churches and for the very same reason. PCsim gone amok, once again!
Click to expand...
Huh? I haven’t heard of that. It is a regional thing?
 
The Church my MIL in Florida did this too. They were The Whatever Town Baptist Church and then dropped the Baptist in the name, but not in the doctrine. shrugs
 
lak611 said:
Huh? I haven’t heard of that. It is a regional thing?
Click to expand...
Sadly, it’s not regional. I’ve seen it when I’ve gone to various parish websites. There’s a parish 3 blocks from our house, that we seldom attend, because they style themselves as a “faith community” instead of as a parish–an indication of deeper problems of heterodoxy and rebellion within it.
 
I don’t understand why they would do this. If somebody really believes in something, I would hope that he would not be ashamed of it. I have respect for Baptists, Lutherans, Methodists, Catholics, etc. who stick to their beliefs much more than those who are wimpy and deny their faith if it is inconvenient to them.
 
lak611 said:
I don’t understand why they would do this. If somebody really believes in something, I would hope that he would not be ashamed of it. I have respect for Baptists, Lutherans, Methodists, Catholics, etc. who stick to their beliefs much more than those who are wimpy and deny their faith if it is inconvenient to them.
Click to expand...
In the case of my friend’s church, they saw it as simply a way to increase their numbers to support their church (financially), but also it was a way to bring people in so they can give them the salvation message. The logic is this: They’re not changing their beliefs, but if a simple name change will entice people to come in, that means more people can potentially be led to Jesus.
 
RLT said:
boston.com/news/local/new_hampshire/articles/2006/12/03/churches_drop_baptist_name_not_principles/

Is this like the phenomenon of denominations becoming “non-denominational”?
Things that make you go hmmm… :hmmm:
Click to expand...
What a brilliant idea. I wonder how many more potential converts would show up in each parish if the parish did not have catholic in the name or saints names? Which leads to the question- if a person who thought they were anti catholic entered a catholic church not knowing it was a catholic church would they be anti when they came out again?
 
I have worked with 3 different Baptist churches over the years (2 Southern Baptist and one Baptist Bible Fellowship), and I don’t blame them for dropping the name.

The term “Baptist” doesn’t even do much to define what a church believes - as the article stated, it simply refers to Protestants who practice baptism by immersion after the person has made a profession of faith.

Between Baptist denominations, there are differences in theological systems as well as differences in church polity, so to many of us Protestants, the term “Baptist” would be less likely to mean “narrow-minded, mean-spirited, self-righteous” and more likely to mean “theological lottery.”

Just my observations - your mileage may vary…
 
Back when we were evangelical Protestant, we attended a church growth workshop.

The suggestion was to re-name your church with something non-threatening and welcome, e.g., “Community.”

Not even “Bible” church, but something secular.

One of the large Assembly of God churches in our city now calls itself simply “The Community.”

What I find scary about this is that it gives you a barrier to knowing which churches are legitimate Protestant churches with orthodox Protestant doctrines, and which ones are cults with Christian-sounding names.

A denomination gives the prospect some idea what the church Statement of Faith says. E.g., I know that the Assemblies of God Statement of Faith says that “we believe in the Baptism of the Holy Spirit and the accompanying evidence of speaking in tongues.” I don’t agree with this doctrine, therefore I would never consider attending an Assemblies of God church other than for a wedding, funeral, or a concert that I was invited to by a friend. But if the church calls itself “The Community,” I might not realize until I was already in the pew that it was A of G, and then I would be faced with an awkward decision to walk out.

Keep in mind that there are Protestant denoms and churches that are “autonomous.” This means that they aren’t held accountable by any Governing Board, Convention, Consistory, Council, etc. outside of themselves. There are advantages to this: you don’t have to give any of your offering to an organization far away geographically, you don’t have to follow any set schedule of Bible readings, Sunday School curricula, or preaching schedule, you can support any mission efforts you choose, including local efforts like the Rescue Mission or Pregnancy Life Care Centers.

So autonomy is not a bad thing.

BUT–pastors and boards of autonomous churches are not held accountable by anyone except themselves. This is extremely dangerous. If a pastor or teacher teaches heresy, no one can step in and dismiss him except the congregation, and if they have been mesmerized by a charismatic preacher/teacher, they might not recognize the heresy. Also, if there is abuse, there is no one that the victim can appeal to (except the Lord, of course). No one will step in and discipline the abuser or fire him/her.

I speak from experience. Our family was kicked out of a local EFree church. There was a tribunal of people that we didn’t even know who condemned us late at night. It was horrifying, and our daughters, now grown, have such bad memories of that church that they still don’t trust churches. (Mary, Mother of God, pray for them!) We tried to find someone to report the abusive pastors to so that there could be an investigation. To our dismay, we discovered the the EFree churches are autonomous and each church/pastor are allowed to do pretty much whatever they please, including treat their members like ****. May God have mercy on that church and those pastors.
 
Hi:
I do not understand why a Baptist Church would want to drop the name Baptist unless it is the conform itself to be like other mainline protestant churches that have no Sunday School, Sunday evening or midweek services. Personally I would not belong to a chruch that did not carry the name Baptist.

Autonomy of a church is the best of all scenarios if the proper safe guards are in place. I do not know about other Baptist churches or mainline protestant churches but Regular Baptist churches have a constitution and a Church Covenant for the purpose of glorifing God by conducting a Baptist Church in accordence with the word of God.
Reception of members, discipline of members, officeers of the church and finances of a Baptist church are all covered by the constitution.

Proud to be Baptist
allischalmers
 
allischalmers said:
Hi:
Personally I would not belong to a chruch that did not carry the name Baptist.
Click to expand...
And I wouldn’t belong to one which did have baptist in the name, which looks to be common enough to get churches to take it out of their name to increase the number of visitors. How embarrassing.
 
allischalmers said:
Hi:
I do not understand why a Baptist Church would want to drop the name Baptist unless it is the conform itself to be like other mainline protestant churches that have no Sunday School, Sunday evening or midweek services. Personally I would not belong to a chruch that did not carry the name Baptist.
Click to expand...
I don’t understand it either. Since I am a Catholic, I wouldn’t belong to a church that did not have Catholic in the name, and if I was Baptist I wouldn’t belong to a church that did not have Baptist in the name. A denomination should be proud of who they are and what they stand for. If somebody doesn’t like them for who they are, there are plenty of “non-denominational” denominations out there.
 
With regard to the “faith community” designation for Catholic churches, I talked to my priest about this briefly. We recently fully amalgamated three churches into one, closing all three parishes and forming a new one. For a while we were a " faith community" but it was only temporary, we are now a parish. I didn’t exactly understand why. Not sure if this applies to all RC but in our case it had something to do with this transition process and not because of it sounding more inclusive (thankfully!)
 
Lil_M said:
With regard to the “faith community” designation for Catholic churches, I talked to my priest about this briefly. We recently fully amalgamated three churches into one, closing all three parishes and forming a new one. For a while we were a " faith community" but it was only temporary, we are now a parish. I didn’t exactly understand why. Not sure if this applies to all RC but in our case it had something to do with this transition process and not because of it sounding more inclusive (thankfully!)
Click to expand...
Parish is a word with a very definite meaning:

An ecclesiastical society, usually not bounded by
territorial limits, but composed of those persons who choose to unite under the charge of a particular priest, clergyman, or minister; also loosely, the territory in which the members of a congregation live.

Or as it more specifically means in Catholic circles:

the local subdivision of a diocese committed to one pastor.

Faith community and the first definition mean basically the same thing.

However, within Catholic circles, congregations that worship under a priest who is part of a non-diocesan order probably isn’t a parish if the ownership and administration is outside normal Canon Law for parishes. My rationale is that while the worshippers are subject to the Bishop, the Priest isn’t (granted he and his order is allowed to be in the diocese at the pleasure of the Bishop).

Additionally, college newman centers are not parishes. Worshippers are officially members of their home parish. In this case, while it appears to be a parish, it is not one organizationally and under Canon Law. They aren’t required to have Finance Councils as are parishes.

IMHO, this is not a big deal for a parish to refer to itself as a faith community. Parish implies organization, money, buildings, etc. If these have been subjects that in the past were divisive, a change in “name” might allow everyone to start over. This being said, there is no excuse or rationalize not having the name of the parish/faith community designated clearly as Catholic.

And in some cases might be a positive as in Lil M’s example above. I can imagine it useful also in situations where the parish has a particular ministry that transcends boundaries as in one located to serve the poor or a particular segment of society (i.e. the deaf).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top