Fighting through the bargain-bins, throwing shoulders and hips to bring you the best deals from the costly world of the internet and its subdomain of equally vicious bargain hunters, the blogosphere. Here’s some of what caught my eye this past week:

Read as New York magazine examines “grups,” who they describe as: “He owns eleven pairs of sneakers, hasn’t worn anything but jeans in a year, and won’t shut up about the latest Death Cab For Cutie CD. But he is no kid. He is among the ascendant breed of grown-up who has redefined adulthood as we once knew it and killed off the generation gap.” And while you’re at it, read Drowned in Sound’s recent interview Death Cab for Cutie.

Read Pitchfork’s “Live at the Witch Trials” which discusses the RIAA’s strategy of suing peer to peer downloaders rather than accomodating to the new music market.

Read as The Guardian interviews several Smiths fans regarding their devotion to the band and read Drowned in Sound’s (7 out of 10 stars) review of Morrissey’s new album. Also, read Pitchfork’s review.

Browse Rolling Stone’s “Ten Bands to Watch” list.

Read Frontpage’s continuing coverage of the scandal revolving around Baylor University’s refusal to grant tenure to Francis Beckwith.

Read “Lincoln’s Five Legged Dog: The Case Against Redefining Marriage” at Evangelical Outpost. The post includes the wonderful line: “Abraham Lincoln was fond of asking, ‘If you call a dog’s tail a leg, how many legs does a dog have?’ ‘Five,’ his audience would invariably answer. ‘No,’ he would politely respond,’ the correct answer is four. Calling a tail a leg does not make it a leg.”

Read Mark Dever’s “The Apparent Piety of Numerical Goals” at the Together For The Gospel blog.

Read “The Baptist Headway: America’s Largest Protestant Denomination and the Culture War.”

If you’re a pastor, think about your week and help Will figure out “The Pastor’s Week” as he seeks a place of service (I’m still waiting for a typical week to base my answer off of).

Read Adrian Warnock’s interview with Mark Driscoll.

Visit the website of the New Pantheon awards, which features Sufjan Stevens as its first ever winner of the prize for albums selling under 500,000.

Read about one Episcopal church’s implementation of the “U2 Eucharist”

Help Wanted: If you know of a God-centered, Reformed, Joy-pursuing Minister of Worship looking for a position, please send him our way.

Look into my ears and see what I’ve been listening to.

Freepay has changed its rules and imposed deadlines, so please, Please PLEASE, help us both earn a free laptop, a free Mac Mini, a free iPod video or a free iPod Nano. Come on, help a brother out….I now only have until May 30.

Read “Secular Chaos or Christian Truth: The Educational Options” by Al Mohler in which he says “Cataloging campus outrages must be a time-consuming task, but The Collegiate Network has been doing this for some years. The Collegiate Network encourages conservative student journalists and monitors the atrocities on America’s college and university campuses. Evidently, there is enough nonsense on America’s campuses to keep this group busy.”

Browse the Onion AV Club’s inventory of “Seven Songs With Factual or Logical Mistakes in the Lyrics,” including U2’s (Pride in the Name of Love).

For those who plan to be in Louisville for the Together For the Gospel conference, Soujourn is having the “Cultivate Beauty” Film Festival which looks interesting (thanks Sean).

Read as Larry Elder asks “How Does Mexico Treat Its Illegals?”

Read “Inventing the News” at Between Two Worlds.

Help Rhett connect college ministry bloggers.

Recap “Video Blogging Week 2006.”

Get yer evidentialist apologetics fix with a list of William Lane Craig’s articles regarding the resurrection.

Read the continuing correspondence between Tom Ascol and Malcom Yarnell of SWBTS regarding that dirty word, “Calvinism.”

Read NPR’s coverage of the newly unveiled/recovered/translated “Gospel of Judas” and read Hugh Hewitt’s thoughts regarding the matter. Also read Dr. Mohler’s thoughts, “From Traitor to Hero?”

Run Windows on your Mac (if you have to) and do it simultaneously.

Read Mark’s “Early Morning Ramble” featuring Max Lucado and Particular Redemption, who could ask for anything more?

Learn “How To Find Your Own Dancing Style.” Also consult the equally helpful “How To Dance To Rap Music.”

Read Tim Challies’ “Mr. Storms and Mr. Taylor, I Respectfully Disagree,” which chronicles the recent discussion regarding comments by Chuck Colson. Challies proceeds to list several tests to use in considering music for worship.

As long as I’m wondering aloud about life in the Southern Baptist Convention, I might as well keep pulling from the barrel of monkeys, right?

There seems to be some confusion regarding the concepts of congregationalism and congregational rule. The practice found in many Southern Baptist churches goes by one name while actually being the other. For the sake of conversation, please humor me by allowing that the two are indeed different (which I hope to show) and that they should be understood and practiced differently.

Mark Dever of Capitol Hill Baptist Church and Nine Marks Ministries takes congregationalism to mean that “no body outside can mandate something for a particular congregation, whether in a matter of discipline or of doctrine.” He continues, noting that “Congregationalism is simply the understanding that the last and final court of appeal in a matter of the life of a local church is not the bishop of Rome (or Rhome) or Constantinople or Washington. The last and final court of appeal in a matter of the life of a local church is, and should be, the local congregation itself.” Sounds a lot like Timothy George’s definition of “autonomy” to me, what about you? Consider again George’s words:

every community of covenanted believers is responsible to God � not to presbytery, bishop, or papal magisterium � for the ordering of its own faith and life. No extra-congregational body, whether association, state or national convention, can or should coerce any local church to act contrary to its own perception of divine truth.

In his booklet A Display of God’s Glory: Basics of Church Structure: Deacons, Elders, Congregationalism & Membership, Dever lists several areas in which the idea of congregationalism is applied Scripturally: church discipline, matters of doctrine, and matters of church membership (directly related to discipline). He then clarifies that congregationalism in no way means the congregation is inerrant.

While Dever’s definition is closely tied to the idea of local autonomy and the governance of the local body, we see that what Dever says and what many Southern Baptists say are not the same thing. In fact, this is an important situation in which we are reminded of the necessity of defining our terms. When a Southern Baptist says “congregationalism,” they often mean “congregational rule,” which is not the same thing.

Congregational rule essentially appeals to the lowest common denominator within a Body. Committees and majority vote rule the life of the congregation and the office of elders simply becomes a mantlepiece, if present at all (though if there is a pastor, it is present, even if many do not acknowledge it). This is important, because we do not see a “majority rule” mentality in the life of the New Testament Church, either in the descriptions of Acts or the prescriptions of Paul.

Many cite Matthew 18:15-17 and Acts 6:1-6 as examples of congregational rule. The common argumentation says “see, Jesus instructs to bring the unrepentant brother before the church and the apostles command the congregation to pick the men for themselves.” But we must note not only what the text says, but what it does not say. Matthew 18 does not say that once an unrepentant sinner is brought before the congregation they then vote to see if they agree with the discipline. Rather, they are made active participants. In Acts 6, the congregation did initially choose, but it was the Apostles who had the final say, not lording it over, but exercising godly discernment for the protection of the Body, bringing the Body in to participate but not to make final decisions.

Congregational rule has done incalcuable damage to churches across our country. Countless committees have turned into factions, church votes have turned into popularity contests, or worse, vendetta forums. It is unwise and unscriptural to lower the standard to the lowest common denominator so that the least mature member “can have a say,” but that’s exactly what we find in many local churches. Please don’t take me to be saying that the implementation of elders will solve all of our churches problems, we’re all sinners, but we’re also all called to follow Scripture. But what I am saying is that Church is not a democracy.

Congregationalism means an active involvement and participation of the congregation in the life of the local body. Congregational rule means majority rule. We must come to understand the two are not synonymous and in fact, might be antithetical to one another.

What are your thoughts? Would you agree with a differentiation between congregationalism and congregational rule? Would you agree with my argument that congregationalism is biblical while congregational rule is not? I look forward to feedback.

• Read “How My Mind Has Changed: The Centrality of the Congregation” by Mark Dever.

As I posted yesterday, I’ve had much experience with and within the Southern Baptist Convention. I’ve attended seminaries, been a member of and minister in churches of varying degrees of Southern Baptist affiliation.

One of the things I’ve yet to see work well is the idea of the local association. For those not familar with the structure of the Southern Baptist Convention, it works from a tier-based cooperative system. This begins at the local associational level, then the state conventions, then the national convention. Churches are expected to participate to varying degrees at each of these levels with the other SBC churches in their area to accomplish ministry beyond the church walls. These structures are meant for cooperation, communication and support but rarely function well.

What we find is that churches are asked to work together simply because of geographical location and little else. While I do think the idea of Baptist autonomy is not entirely true and has many faults as we discussed yesterday, there is a wide range of theological positions within the SBC, even at the local associational level. On one hand, it is healthy to ask local churches to put those theological differences (within orthodoxy) aside for ministry. However, on the other hand, because these theological differences might be important, cooperation rarely actually happens and the nature of SBC politics prevents it from ever happening because both “sides” are jockeying for power for their pet issue.

Is geography the best way to “assign” partners for ministry? What’s more, local churches are asked to contribute time, finances and resources to local associations simply on the basis of geography. It is time we ask whether this system is still viable. Is it a better investment of our resources to seek out like-minded churches rather than geographically close churches?

Those who share common convictions are much more likely to cooperate and work hard for a common goal. I wholeheartedly believe in evangelism and baptism, but I’m sorry, I won’t be participating in the local association’s baptism-rally, chasing an artificial goal sent down by Bobby Welch. And, let’s face it, the other local associational churches wouldn’t want us because our heart is elsewhere and they already think we’re odd enough for believing God is sovereign.

The Southern Convention is facing issues such as these at every level. How these issues are addressed will, in the long run, determine the health or death of the convention as a whole. While geographical associations may have worked well in the past, when there was a more full theological majority (because most of the SBC was Reformed, but that’s another issue!), they no longer seem viable.

The answer seems to lie in doing away with the old system (something I’m not sure the SBC does well) and encouraging local churches to establish new and stronger bonds, not only with the church next door, but across the country. We ought to encourage local bodies to develop their theological identity within the convention and then partner with other like-minded churches. The level of passion for the work would increase dramatically.

The problem is once again that what is said and what is practiced by ‘autonomy’ are not one and the same. Truth be told, the Southern Baptist Convention does not want local bodies to develop their own theological identities because they’re more interested in upholding the pretty but false-front town of unity. Institutions such as the local association are implemented to skirt the issue of real theological dialogue, yet it seems that just what the convention fears the most (real theological dialogue) is what it needs most.

Please share your thoughts regarding the Southern Baptist tradition of local associations. Am I wrong here? Are they worthwhile? Have I perhaphs been too critical? Please share your thoughts.

This past Sunday Gary Brumley, our Minister of Worship announced that, beginning July 1, he will assume the worship dutis of Christ the Redeemer Church in Fort Worth (listen here). We love Gary and are sad to see him go and we will seek to uphold him and strengthen him for the tasks ahead. Needless to say, this leaves us with a position to fill.

Grace Community Church exists to Equip God’s people to delight in His glory and declare that glory to the nations! We are located in Glen Rose, TX, which is approximately 50 minutes southwest of Fort Worth. We are a mid-sized congregation (150 or so) located in a small town (2,500 people) in the midst of Texas hill country.

Our congregation is six years old. We are evangelical. We are evangelistic. We are Reformed. We are committed to doctrinal soundness. We seek to be centered on God’s glory. We are elder-led. We seek to pursue our joy in God’s glory through the building up of love and sound doctrine.

We are seeking a Minister of Worship to work with the Teaching Pastor in guiding our body in worship, leading our weekly Sunday morning corporate gathering in praise through song, Scripture/responsive readings and prayer. We believe that doctrine must ignite the heart, following a “revelation/response” model. We desire to teach about God while worshipping Him, understanding that, the more we see of Him, the more naturally we will want to worship Him alone.

We practice a “blended” style of worship, incorporating hymns and modern God-centered, doctrinally sound compositions. Our congregation is familiar with the music of Sovereign Grace Ministries, RUF, traditional hymns, and songs from other God-centered traditions. We will not sacrifice doctrine or joy but believe the two are intimately interwoven and seek a like-minded minister to help implement this vision.

If you are interested in possibly pursuing this position, please Email your resum� with a cover letter in Word format to Brent Thomas with “Minister of Worship” as the subject line. We ask that all interested parties please read more about us at our website here.

• Visit our website to learn more.
• Visit the city of Glen Rose’s website.
• Email me your resum� and cover letter.

Thank you and God bless,

Brent Thomas, V.D.M.
Verbi Domini Minister
Minister of the Word of the Lord
Teaching Pastor/Elder

Grace Community Church
P.O. Box 2186
Glen Rose, TX 76043

Coming up through the ranks of “the” Southern Baptist Theological Seminary for my M.Div. and now pursuing application for doctoral studies at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, I find myself exposed to many facets of Southern Baptist life and politics and life of politics.

As with any subculture, certain catch-phrases seem to dominate conversations and as with any subculture, those catch-phrases may be ambiguous, confusing or at worst, (intentionally or not) dishonest.

One of those catch-phrases in Southern Baptist life is the “autonomy” of the local church. Given great lipservice yet rarely understood in practice, according to Timothy George, “autonomy of the local church” means that

every community of covenanted believers is responsible to God � not to presbytery, bishop, or papal magisterium � for the ordering of its own faith and life. No extra-congregational body, whether association, state or national convention, can or should coerce any local church to act contrary to its own perception of divine truth.

George’s seems to be a standard Southern Baptist definition, stressing the idea that though churches may cooperate, they are not to be controlled by any outside entities. George goes on to clarify that, though this definition allows significant freedom,

The idea that a given congregation can believe anything it chooses, or do anything it dares, however outrageous or unbiblical, and still be considered in good standing within the wider community of faith flies in the face of both New Testament ecclesiology and Free Church history. This distortion, born of modern rugged individualism, has eviscerated the corporate witness of the church in an age which needs desperately to hear an unmuffled trumpet from the camp of Zion.

Fair enough, right? A Latter Day Saint congregation may not be Southern Baptist. We must draw the line somewhere, but the question immediately arises as to how this is to be played out. On the one hand, we are told that local churches are bound by “no extra-congregational body,” yet on the other hand, a congregation cannot “believe anything it chooses.” So who decides what to believe and what to do in the Convention? That becomes the $60,000 Pyramid Question, doesn’t it? While one would hope that general orthodoxy would be the guiding factor, but I’m afraid it often goes much farther than mere question of orthodoxy (which in and of itself is often debated).

For example, if I am convicted (and I am) that if the roles are properly defined and implemented then Scripture allows for women Deacons, can I still be Southern Baptist? Can I teach at a Southern Baptist Seminary? While some might say that the ability to teach academically does not affect the life of my church, it certainly does in the SBC. As in many denominations, the seminaries are seen as official institutions of the larger convention and therefore, rejection by one of the academic institutions carries with it the stigma that your church is out of step with the convention as a whole. Further, the seminaries are seen as the theological guardians (rightly or wrongly) of the local churches. Therefore, for a pastor to be told that he cannot teach academically is also to be told that his theology is unacceptable to the convention, which has just robbed him of “autonomy,” provided the beliefs in question are orthodox.

If I cannot teach because of my (and my church’s) theological convictions, then why not and who makes that call? If my church is actively putting forth funds for that Seminary, shouldn’t we have a say and don’t we have a deeply entrenched concern about what is being taught? If a Southern Baptist pastor (with proper credentials of course) could not teach in a Southern Baptist seminary, is that pastor truly given local autonomy? Apparently not if he wants to play in the larger SBC reindeer games. He’s free to implement these things as long as he isn’t interested in actual SBC involvement.

Or, let’s go right for the jugular. What if I’m Reformed (and openly so, which seems to be the greater crime in the SBC, or at least in Texas Baptist life)? I will speak from experience and say that I’ve openly and repeatedly had my status as a member of the SBC questioned because of my soteriology with the theologically astute argument “well, that’s not Baptist!” Rumors abound about Paige Patterson’s open and subversive moves against the teaching of Reformed Theology on the campus of Southwestern Seminary. The very fact that many cringe at the fact that I’m writing this while applying to the seminary proves that something’s rotten in Denmark (or at least in its convention).

What if I become theoligically convicted of adopting liturgical worship, or implementing a house church? What if I do not choose Lifeway curriculum (a crime for which I have had a friend’s “SBC Status” questioned)? The list could and does go on. I know for a fact that if I happen to be A-millennial (which I am), I could not teach for at least one SBC academic institution. The difficulty in answering these questions in the Southern Baptist context proves that while, autonomy is mouthed, it is not lived. So in practice, what we see is a (thinly veiled) double-edged sword. While openly proclaiming “autonomy,” it is understood in the Convention that you will not pursue certain issues in the local church if you want any say at all in the “good ol’ boy network” and in fact, you will be excluded from much of what should be yours as a participating convention church.

The deeper question still is whether autonomy is actually a good thing, and deeper still, is it biblical? The early church model implies that the Apostles, and Paul in particular exercised control (at least theological, but also in practice) over the developing churches. There was always accountability involved. The Protestant Reformation largely retained a hierarchical accountability structure and it was not until the rise of the Anabaptists that we see a true move for “autonomy,” stressing of the priesthood of the believer as an accountability check at the local church level.

In practice, the SBC does not practice true autonomy and many know it while still claiming it as a “Baptist distinctive.” However, there is indeed a hierarchical structure within the SBC and there are penalties for crossing their invisible lines. SBC politics is one of the most vicious sports I have ever witnessed and few who have been bitten by it would truly rally around the notion of autonomy; scars speak louder than words.

I’d love your thoughts on this. What is meant by autonomy? Is it actually practiced? Is it biblical? Am I over-emphasizing the relationship between churches and seminaries in this issue?

• Read an excerpt from George’s article.

You know that it will be an interesting week on the blog when you feel the need to begin by discussing the idea of dialogue before posting anything else.

I both admit and regret that there have been phases of my life during which I have enjoyed saying things simply to get reactions from people. While on the surface I tried to paint it as “getting people to think,” truth be told, I liked to get a rise out of people.

I pray that those days are past. I have prayed and learned the hard way that there are better ways to “get people to think” than intentionally making initially hard statements. I also pray that I have learned to hold my tongue. However, I have a very interactive learning style. I process and formulate positions much better in dialogue. It is sometimes better for me to sit down with an opposing viewpoint. But I have also learned that this is not everyone’s learning style and what I might perceive as open, friendly discussion, others often perceive as argument.

The astute reader will have already made the connection: I am beginning the week this way because what follows will, for many, be perceived as argumentative. However, that is not my heart (as best I can know it, per Jeremiah 17:9). It’s a difficult line to walk when you know that what you’re about to say will be perceived one way, no matter how you frame it. I find that this happens quite often in the Southern Baptist Convention, which is the topic of my posts this week.

It seems that one of the things lacking (at least in my experience) in the Convention is true theological dialogue. While that is publically denied, I suggest trying to stand up at the next convention to discuss the atonement. It won’t happen. Say a couple of words about inerrancy and receive applause, but as Dr. Denny Burk has recently said, “Inerrancy is Not Enough“. At some point, simply for the sake of denominational health, we must be willing to engage in difficult discussions, yet outside of seminary grounds, such conversations are not only avoided, they are discouraged for the sake of a pretty but fake unity.

The more young Southern Baptist men I meet, the more I’m becoming convinced that the convention is disenfranchising them. There seems to be a growing generation of men who understand that the church cannot stand without doctrine. The Church must not shy away from doctrine because “it can be divisive” but rather, openly wrestle with it that we may “show ourselves in all respects to be models of good works, and in our teaching, show integrity dignity, and sound speech that cannot be condemned, so that an opponent may be put to shame, having nothing evil to say about us” (Titus 2:7-8). Doctrine is simply the formulation of our beliefs. We all have them, we just don’t all like to talk about them.

Doctrinal discussion, when handled correctly and in humility is simply the living out of “iron sharpening iron” (Proverbs 27:17). Disagreement does not have to end in division and disagreement does not always mean disunity. It is my prayer that the Southern Baptist Convention learns to practice these things before they disenfranchise some of the very men who most want to see it saved. There seems to be a practice of aiming for a false-front unity while underhandedly attacking others without being willing to discuss the actual issues. This cannot continue if the convention wants to survive.

Please share your thoughts. Am I the only one who feels silenced by the Convention for my theological views? Is theological dialogue actually encouraged and I’m just missing it? Is the Convention in as much trouble as many say? Please join me in discussion. I’d especially love comments from those not in the Convention: what is the perception of the Southern Baptist Convention from those not inside? Please join me in proving that doctrinal discussion, and even doctrinal disagreement can be beneficial and that it can produce a stronger unity than mere political maneuvering ever could.

It’s often said that time heals all wounds. Though we know in our hearts that it’s not true, perhaps part of the reason the saying persists is because time helps us to forget. Though the wounds may not have healed, the pain fades with time, especially if they’re not your wounds.

Approximately eight months after Hurricane Katrina, the wounds are still painfully fresh for many. The level of destruction is simply hard to fathom, the depth of hurt is difficult to communicate.

Over the past few days I’ve had the pleasure of getting to know Pastor Eddie Exposito of Sovereign Grace Fellowship of Slidell, LA. Our church body has been seeking out ways for long-term involvement in the hurricane relief efforts. Through that process, we have come to know Eddie and Sovereign Grace Fellowship’s efforts to help a broken community find healing and life.

The opportunities for ministry are simply overwhelming. Eddie and others have helped clear yards, gut houses, distribute supplies and most importantly, present the Gospel. Though it’s hard from a mere human perspective, such events are often blessings because it brings a receptiveness to the Gospel previously not there. People are broken and looking for hope. People are given an eternal perspective in ways they never dreamed, but we must be faithful to attend to the harvest.

I encourage you to seek out ways that you (individually or corporately) can minister in this situation. Please consider going to work (there is more than enough to do), sending others to work, sending supplies, sending money, but most importantly, sending prayer.

Remember Christ’s words in Matthew 25:34-40:

Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. 35For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, 36I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’ 37Then the righteous will answer him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? 38And when did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? 39And when did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?’ 40And the King will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.’

• Visit the Sovereign Grace Fellowship website.
• Become involved in Sovereign Grace Fellowship’s “Homeland Missions” to this hurting community.