Chapter 6: Themes from the MR Rules Consultation
Before we open this chapter about themes from the consultation, we include some of the assurances of prayer that were expressed in the surveys and at the Baptist Assembly.
“Praying over the Baptist family at this time.” (Church)
“We will be praying for the Council and our national leadership as they deliberate in March.” (Church)
“We pray for the BU and ask for God’s wisdom, discernment and grace to be upon all who are involved in this.” (Minister)
“I will be praying for wisdom for all involved in this difficult decision.” (Minister)
“You are in my prayers as you navigate this difficult and complex issue.” (Minister)
“I am praying for wisdom and grace for all members of BUGB.” (Minister)
“By your Spirit. Lord, come and lead us with your love and compassion as your Baptist Church in the UK, as we consider the way forward.” (Assembly)
“God bring your wisdom and peace into these consultations and give us peace as we move forward and bless all people with the love and peace you alone can bring.” (Assembly)
“May God’s wisdom and discernment govern all your deliberations.” (Assembly)
Contents of this page:
Introduction to the chapter
At the end of each survey respondents were given the opportunity to make a final comment. For example, in the church’s survey respondents were asked:
“Is there anything else you would like us to hear about your views on these matters?” With similar questions to ministers about their
“own view” and to Regional Ministers about their
“Association’s view”.
43% of those completing the church survey completed the final comment box, 66% of the ministers and 64% of Regional Ministers completed the final comment box.
We have read all the comments, literally hundreds. It was striking that people very often had taken great care in what they wrote. Every comment was read and analysed carefully so that we were able to identify themes accurately and authentically. What were we hearing again and again? These themes are summarised in this chapter, with sample quotes taken from the comments to illustrate each one. The purpose of including quotes is to give an indication of some of the ways that people wrote about the themes we have identified in our analysis of the comments. After each quote we have identified its source.
In this chapter we have also drawn on the recurring themes we heard in the Baptist Assembly Consultation Listening Space. These themes were taken from the various ways in which people were able to participate in the Listening Space, both in conversation and in written form. It is the latter from which we have taken quotes. For more details about the
Baptist Assembly Consultation Listening Space, see chapter 5.
Inevitably, there may be comments written that were important to the person who wrote them but that do not appear as one of the themes. This will be because they were not repeated sufficiently to be included in the themes from the consultation.
It is interesting to note that the majority of comments in the surveys expressed clear and firm responses; perhaps equating to the 0-2 and 8-10 scores in the survey questions. There were fewer comments articulated in the ‘middle’ perhaps because of uncertainty, complexity or nuance. These notable, absent views would have fallen within the ‘neutral’ space (3-7) on the pie and bar charts. There may be a variety of reasons for this relative silence. Perhaps it is because these ‘silent’ respondents find it harder to put their views into words. Perhaps it is because they are less sure what they want to say; perhaps because they do not have a single view on the questions. Maybe it is because they are unsure what they think or perhaps because their church does not have any clear view on these matters. Perhaps because their church is already living with a diverse congregation, holding different views. There may be other reasons why they are silent. It is important to be aware of the silence when reading the quotes.
The themes identified are often interconnected. As you read this chapter you may be making connections with what you have read in other chapters of the Report.
Finally, it is interesting to note that a number of comments did not refer simply to removing the bracketed section, but also to a redefinition of marriage. It would appear that, for some respondents, the removal of the bracketed section equated or would equate to a redefinition of marriage by BUGB. It is possible that their response to the particular questions were affected by their view on a definition of marriage. It is not clear why this assumption was made nor whether it might have derived from materials other than the surveys. Nor is it possible to know the extent to which this assumption was in fact being made by those who participated in the consultation and who did not specifically mention it in their comments.
“The leadership and vast majority of the congregation are very much against redefining marriage and are already talking about the likelihood of leaving the BU should it [the removal of the bracketed section] go ahead.” (Church)
“To do this isn’t just to change the rules for accredited ministers, it redefines the Baptist Union stance on marriage. To allow a minister to enter a same-sex marriage without changing the Union statement on marriage would be hypocrisy.” (Minister)
The three themes we identified from our analysis of the comments at the end of the churches’ and ministers’ surveys and the Listening Space at the Baptist Assembly, are:
-
Approaches to the Bible
-
Relationship with BUGB
-
Baptist identity and unity.
We explore these themes in the pages below.
Approaches to the Bible
A considerable number of comments referred to different approaches to the Bible, which were articulated in different ways, as respondents to the surveys sought to be heard about how important the Bible is to them.
For many respondents, a correct approach to the Bible and to specific texts contained within it understands that marriage is between a man and woman and equates homosexuality with sin, the acceptance of homosexuality as error and the teaching of anything apart from this view as potentially dangerous to the Gospel and its power to change society. For others setting out their views in this section, the proper approach to the Bible was to read it as a call to love, the importance of justice and a welcome and affirmation for all who express their sexuality through a same-sex relationship.
Those who take what is usually called an orthodox, traditional or conservative approach to the Bible urged the Council to hold to their approach to the Bible in their decision making.
“The church’s standpoint should be based on traditional biblical teaching on this issue.” (Church)
“Scripture is our authority as our rules state, and we seek to live by what God’s word states.” (Church)
“At root this is not a matter of sexual identity, this is a matter of biblical inerrancy.” (Minister)
“The road is narrow that we Christians are called to follow, we will be mocked scoffed at and ridiculed for standing up for God’s word, which has been passed down to us over 4000 years.” (Assembly)
“Times and seasons change, the Word of God does not. Word always in season. Jesus is the same yesterday and for ever. I pray we leave well alone.” (Assembly)
Concern was expressed about the effect of a change in the MR Rules on members of the church.
“I think our folk would feel that it would be difficult to portray ourselves as a firmly Bible-based denomination if the section in brackets were removed” (Church)
[If the bracketed section were removed it would cause] “confusion about what the Bible says godly, faithful Christian living and holiness looks like.” (Church)
[A change would be] “very negative because we could no longer defend the inerrancy of the Bible.” (Church)
“If scripture were undermined in this issue it would open up the possibility that other scriptures could be called into question which in my view would be a tragedy.” (Minister)
A notable number of people took the opportunity in the comment boxes to outline their view more fully, quoting biblical texts and giving a clear explanation of their reading of those texts. In most cases these comments were definite, determined and sometimes adamant. In some cases, they were accompanied by calls to the Council not to compromise or change their view on marriage, because it would be unbiblical.
A number of the people we listened to at the Assembly also outlined this approach to the Bible. They spoke of the importance of biblical authority sometimes drawing on biblical texts to assert their view.
Some of those who approach the Bible in this way were concerned about people’s salvation. They were concerned that a change of doctrine on marriage would risk the saving grace of Jesus, with people living in sin and therefore unable to receive salvation. We also heard this concern expressed in the listening at the Baptist Assembly. It was sometimes informed by the person’s own experience of salvation and a desire for others to experience this too.
“The truth of the Word of God would be compromised … we are to love all people, but it is unloving not to tell them how God wants them to live. So, the future of God’s plans for salvation would be compromised.” (Church)
“Due to the fact that we believe that scripture is clear on the subject of marriage, it would have the potential to bring confusion among us and for our new believers, which we see on a regular basis – this would encourage them to compromise on other biblical truths.” (Minister)
“I am a pastor and preacher and I love Jesus and I love people, and I am horrified that Council is even considering this question, which is a total rejection of the Gospel … if we tell people they are not in sin, then we are telling them they do not need to repent and they are not saved.” (Assembly)
Furthermore, this approach to the Bible led some to comment that the church needs to be counter-cultural, rather than shaped by the prevailing culture. We heard this at the Assembly too. We heard a concern that a decision to remove the bracketed section would be to abandon obedience to the Bible and would mean the church was being led by society.
“BUGB should be standing up for the truth of the Bible and not the pressure of culture.” (Church)
“The Gospel sometimes requires us to be counter-cultural in order to be faithful.” (Assembly)
Some of the comments outlining what is understood to be a conservative, orthodox or traditional biblical view were accompanied by sadness that they hadn’t been able to reach an alternative conclusion from the Bible. This sadness was often connected to LGBTIQA+ family members and/or LGBTIQA+ people coming to church. This was particularly true at the Baptist Assembly and in the ministers’ responses, less so in responses from churches.
At the Baptist Assembly we heard from a number of people that were holding a sometimes complex, nuanced, middle place, in which they had a conservative reading of the Bible, but wanted to welcome and include people who are LGBTIQA+ in their church. Some of the responses in the ministers’ surveys and in the listening at the Baptist Assembly spoke of being on a journey personally, grappling the Bible, often in light of the experience of meeting people who are LGBTIQA+ and hearing their stories and experiences.
“I find myself torn between a pastoral desire to be inclusive and a traditional view of marriage, as I have been taught to understand it in scripture. However, through study I now see that such a ‘traditional’ view may not be as clear as I have been led to think. That leads me to question my thinking, but feeling uncomfortable at the same time.” (Minister)
“I feel torn in that my pastoral heart wants to affirm those who are living in a loving committed same-sex relationship, and to welcome all, whatever their sexuality and hear calls for equality, but I still can’t abandon my understanding of scripture that marriage is between a man and a woman.” (Minister)
“I have wrestled with the complexity of human sexuality. The engagement between pastoral theology and academic theology is a difficult area, and many scholars whose abilities far exceed mine hold opposite positions.” (Minister)
A notable number of comments in the surveys came from those who have a different approach to the Bible. They focus on the love of Jesus, on justice and on the value of lived experience. This approach to the Bible leads them to affirm LGBTIQA+ people and want them to play a full part in the life of the church. Some commented that they celebrated how it was possible to read the Bible differently on a host of topics (women in leadership, divorce and remarriage, just war, etc) and remain in relationship with one another.
“I was inspired by a colleague who asked why we were so bothered about what people did in bed when perhaps we should be asking whether they have a bed. Where are the true Kingdom values?” (Minister)
“This is a matter of justice and equality – it is made possible for me because I am not a hardliner who takes the Bible literally.” (Minister)
“We’ve modernised our view of slavery, despite it being scriptural. We’ve modernised our view of women’s ministry. Perhaps it is time to modernise our view of same-sex relations. Scripture contains eternal values together with the culturally dependent. No wonder we disagree!” (Church)
“Jesus said that he came so that everyone might have abundant life. We respond in the light of that.” (Church)
“I’m as much interested in the unity of the Christian community in dealing with difficult issues as the outcome. Can we walk together with those who come to different conclusions reading the same Bible and seeking the same Spirit of Jesus?” (Minister)
“May the decision we make together swing wide the doors, make straight the paths and allow those who have been rejected by the Church to know that they are loved, chosen and valued.” (Assembly)
Perhaps the two quotes below go some way to sum-up some of the difficulties embodied in this theme.
“This issue splits our denomination because we take different positions on biblical interpretation. I’m not sure how that’s ever going to change.” (Minister)
“The debate is not actually about sexuality; it is about our theology of Scripture. Over such a fundamental issue parties will not be reconciled.” (Minister)
Some people, both in the church survey and the ministers’ survey, asked for more resources to help with reading the Bible. In some cases the resources requested were to help people to reach a specific view, but in most cases the hope was for resources that would help understand the different readings of the Bible on matters relating to human sexuality and/or to understand more about ways of reading the Bible. This is expanded in
chapter 7 about Resources.
Relationship with BUGB
Please note: the Baptist Union of Great Britain is referred to as BUGB, the BU and as the Union in people’s responses in the survey. For authenticity in the quotes, we have retained whatever language the respondent used.
When asked about staying in relationship with others with whom a person or church might disagree about an accredited minister being in a same-sex marriage, 36% of churches and 27% of ministers said they would be unable to do so. 20% of churches and 44% of ministers said they could. 25% of churches and 23% of ministers gave a neutral response. It is therefore perhaps not surprising to find comment after comment in the surveys talking about division and about the possibility of leaving BUGB.
“We are distressed you are even thinking about it and have already agreed as a church to leave the BU if you take this decision [to remove the bracketed section].” (Church)
“The recognition of same-sex marriage or an Anglican type fudge would mean either the church would have to dissociate itself from the BU or my wife and I and possibly others would leave.” (Church)
“I can’t be the only pastor of a church questioning its financial support for BMS and Home Mission in the light of this fundamental fracturing of trust and relationship, seeing even the asking of the question as an abandonment of historical commitment to the Bible.” (Minister)
“Many of our churches would fundamentally disagree with this decision [to remove the bracketed section] and could respond negatively towards the association or even leave the Union.” (Regional Minister)
“The process so far has caused division and I feel we will lose churches whatever the Council decides.” (Regional Minister)
Some spoke of a hope that their church would be willing to stay in BUGB because they value the tradition within the Baptist movement of staying together despite differences. Some who spoke about staying want the bracketed section to remain, whilst others want it to be removed. They expressed a determination to stay in relationship with churches who hold a different view and a hope that they could continue to remain together in spite of their differences, however painful or hard that might be.
“We are already in relationship with churches with whom we disagree on this issue and therefore will not be withdrawing if the decision is not the one we want or hope for.” (Church)
“Most of our churches/ministers represent a wide variety of views. Whatever happens I think we’ll find a way through it together.” (Regional Minister)
“My view of biblical sin is different from theirs, will I be able to stay in covenant with them? I don’t know. It all feels very confusing.” (Minister)
“We would struggle to stay in the BU if the rules are not changed but would rather be in the Union even if we disagree with some of the members.” (Church)
“We would struggle to stay in the BU if the rules are not changed but would do so for the sake of unity.” (Church)
“We are being asked ‘would you leave the Union?’ While we would be unhappy to alter the accreditation system, we would rather be in the Union even if we disagree with some other members.” (Church)
“I would not be willing to walk away from fellowship with other Baptists because they took a different view.” (Minister)
“Spirit of Unity hold us together so in our diversity of many doctrines, views, passions and theologies, we can hold together our Baptist family.” (Assembly)
A number of Regional Ministers talked about the importance of supporting all churches, whatever the church’s view.
“It is our role to support our churches even if we disagree with their theology.” (Regional Ministers)
“Regional Ministers will support all churches regardless of their thoughts on the matter.” (Regional Ministers)
Some churches felt that a decision to remove the bracketed section would undermine their relationship with BUGB. They were concerned that it might be difficult for people outside the church to understand how the church could have a different view to BUGB.
“This would inevitably lead to confusion when outsiders discover that the (large?) majority of BUGB churches (including our own) are not affirming. Rather than feeling supported by BUGB on our mission we would feel undermined.” (Church)
“We would find ourselves having to defend what we believe and trying to explain why the BU take a different stance.” (Church)
Some ministers in the survey and at the Baptist Assembly expressed concerns and questions about their job security should their church decide to leave BUGB. In particular, what would happen to their housing and pension? We also heard concerns about what would happen to church buildings where they are owned by BUGB.
A number of comments spoke of their belief that a small minority were planning to bring in the change as part of a wider strategy to move BUGB away from being evangelical to a more liberal movement. This was particularly present as a perception within the minister’s survey. It was also articulated in the church surveys and in some conversations at the Baptist Assembly. In some cases, this perception resulted in a single-minded determination not to let that happen. In other cases, this seemed to lead to a resignation that it was inevitable and therefore that leaving the Union was also going to be inevitable at some point.
“There is a feeling among a number of our church members that the proposal to alter the Ministerial Rules is being pushed by a vocal minority who have as their ultimate aim the celebration of same-sex marriage in Baptist Churches.” (Church)
“The manner in which the denomination has allowed a minority to attempt to achieve an acceptance of a diametrically opposing position by attending to widen the narrow gateway of the Baptist Accreditation scheme, is alarming.” (Minister)
There was concern and regret expressed by some about the tone of the disagreement, about the language being used and about the way some people are speaking about each other. In some cases they articulated a hope that this could be different.
“We are all concerned with the tone people from both sides of the argument sometimes adopt.” (Church)
“The language used by some has been particularly problematic, especially when the holding of Christian faith and salvation in Christ is called into question …. Such conduct has been pastorally damaging and harmful to the missional life of the wider Baptist Union.” (Church)
“Disagreeing well is something we don’t do well. I hope we can learn to.” (Minister)
“I lament the positioning, campaigning and polarisation taking place in our movement.” (Minister)
I’m worried that the debate is becoming polarised without any nuance or grace. We are divided into bigots vs weak liberals. Our Union is more mature than that stereotyping.” (Minister)
“The vitriolic commentary around this consultation has been damaging and needs to be called out. Those involved need to be held to account. These are people’s lives and souls and hearts that are being trampled and the damage to mental and emotional well-being is done in moments and is almost impossible to heal.” (Minister)
Baptist Identity and Unity
Baptist identity and unity emerged as a theme in the listening at the Baptist Assembly and within the Ministers’ survey. A majority of the comments about this theme referred to:
i) autonomy of the local church in decision making and
ii) holding together in difference.
Interestingly, Baptist identity is not a particular theme in the church survey. Some ministers and Regional Ministers mentioned specifically the
Declaration of Principle. See the Appendices.
The autonomy of the local church
A notable number of respondents affirmed the importance of the autonomy of the local church in interpreting the Bible and discerning God’s will. Some expressed tension between this and the national accreditation process for ministers. At the Baptist Assembly in particular we heard concern about the decision about MR Rules being made ‘centrally’ rather than in the local church.
“I think it is important that the Baptist Union is an environment where the different views can co-exist, where each local church holds its own conviction in the subject and where we respect those who hold a different view than ourselves.” (Minister)
“Our denomination is gifted with a breadth and a diversity which I celebrate, and I value the right of the local church to discern together, through scripture, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and the authority of Jesus Christ, what and how God would have us live on all matters…. Keeping the definition would prevent many churches calling the person who they believe God wants them to call, as an accredited minister! This is not Baptist.” (Minister)
“As a church, we like the Baptist principle of churches making their own decisions on calling pastors.” (Church)
“As Baptists committed to a congregational polity surely issues of discipline should be matters for the local church – is not this an inference to be drawn from our Declaration of Principle?” (Minister)
“We need to retain the ability of our churches to listen to God and call who they feel led to.” (Assembly)
“We would want to celebrate this diversity – and support the Declaration of Principle’s expression of liberty for each church to discern the mind of Christ in their context.” (Regional Minister)
Holding Together in Difference
The other strong element of Baptist identity that was affirmed by some was about holding together in difference. This was usually expressed as a hope for a way forward with matters relating to human sexuality and the bracketed section in the MR Rules. Some referred to other matters over which there is significant difference of view, yet Baptist churches hold together.
“We are a diverse people, let us celebrate this as we trust each other’s conviction and calling.” (Minister)
“In an ideal world I’d love us as Baptists to be at peace with us holding different opinions on this in what for me is a secondary issue and focus on being united in sharing the hope and saving grace of Jesus.” (Minister)
“It is essential to promote tolerance of varying opinions, and so preserve the unity and strength of the denomination among both ministers and churches. It is our core beliefs stated in the Declaration of Principle which matter most.” (Minister)
[At our church meeting] “it was noted that it was part of Baptist history that not all Baptist churches have to agree with each other.” (Church)
“Always we have opposing views in tension – remaining in fellowship over issues as vital as the nature of salvation.” (Assembly)
“It truly breaks my heart to see Baptist churches and ministers divided over this.” (Minister)
A number of Regional Ministers stressed the importance of supporting all churches in their Association, regardless of the church’s view.
“I would hope that we might be able to realise that the scope of our Declaration of Principle enables us to associate with those who hold different views, and that we allow freedom to come to different conclusions without penalising them.” (RM)
“We are an association of churches … [we] have sought to support all churches and ministers regardless of their views.” (RM)
Perhaps this quote best sums up what we heard regarding the importance of Baptist identity to those who emphasised this:
“The Baptist Union has always had differences of opinion between churches and within churches and that should continue to be respected. Changing the rules allows churches to interpret the Bible as they see fit, which is in line with our differences in belief. This is consistent with the Declaration of Principle, which is the basis of our Union.” (Church)
The themes highlighted in this chapter have been identified from the comments in the surveys and the listening at the Baptist Assembly. They need to be read in light of the responses in the surveys. Our hope is that the comments help to articulate the themes. Perhaps they are also a reminder of the people behind the numbers in the surveys; the ministers and churches who completed the surveys.