Soul Liberty

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2017
Messages
7,102
Age
53
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Married
I had never heard of this term. It comes from a Baptist minister. What do you think?
Soul Liberty
The distinctive Baptist doctrine concerning the freedom to make your own decision on what to believe is called "Soul Liberty". Soul liberty is a logical corollary of the Priesthood of the Believer, since individual access to God should empower each believer to discover the truth.

Soul Liberty eliminates the possibility of ecclesiastical control. It gets expressed in Baptist polity: each Baptist church, even if a member of a Convention or Conference, is truly autonomous. No Conference or Convention decisions can ever be binding on a Baptist congregation. Within the congregation, Soul Liberty is expressed in purely democratic congregational government.

The point of Soul Liberty is not "every person for him or herself." It is rather the belief that God's truth and God's will can be found best by those who seek it through exercising the freedom of individual conscience., under the direction of the Holy Spirit and the authority of*
God's word.*

The danger in Soul Liberty is the potential for lack of individual accountability. *Wrongly exercised, Soul Liberty can produce renegade individuals. However, creedalism can and has produced renegade denominations, and that's worse.*
 

NewCreation435

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
4,914
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
I was a member of the Baptist faith for many years and currently attend a Baptist church and have never heard of this term. From what i have seen, Baptist tend to trust the congregation to make decisions rather than individuals
 

Josiah

simul justus et peccator
Valued Contributor
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
13,647
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
I think that radical Protestantism is sadly often infected with radical individualism.....



Christianity has a STRONG sense of community, family, communion..... the PEOPLE of God. It is a very, very strong theme in the OT and carries over to the NT. The PEOPLE of God. The Israel. The FAMILY of God. The CHILDREN of God. The Church as the one, holy, catholic community of ALL believers. God gave the Bible to US (not to any individual person or denomination). God gave His promises to US (not to any individual person or denomination). God abides with US (not just some individual person or denomination). Until the Enlightenment, the liturgy and the hymns of the church nearly always spoke of US (in contrast to more modern songs and their endless ME, ME, ME.... I, I, I)

This still continues in the Eastern Orthodox Church (immune to the RADICAL individualism of pre-Christian Rome and post Enlightenment West)... and it's strongly embraced in Lutheranism (and to a slightly less extend Calvinism), the Reformers. But Radical Protestants who followed Luther and Calvin (to which both were very critical) were revolutionaries, throwing the "baby out with the bathwater" and always appealed a LOT to individual feelings, interpretations, etc. - throwing out all previous tradition, Councils, etc., replacing "Jesus and WE" with "Jesus and ME." All the radical Protestants have a foundational sense of INDIIVIDUALISM and condemnation of community. They insist it's just Jesus and self, the Holy Spirit teaching/leading just ME, new ideas, new thing, new that cuz it appeals to ME. Sadly, this is found in Catholicism too (with it's OBSESSION with it itself) but in the RCC, it's the individualism of the denomination as opposed to Radical Protestantism where it's the individualism of the person. Same thing philosophically (and politically) but at least the RCC retains SOME sense of community.

In truth, here (as in most matters) there is a balance. A "both/and." The very reality that I (individually) left a denomination and joined another reveals that I accept SOME sense of the individual. However, I do this very relunctantly..... and I passionately embrace ECUMENICAL Councils and Tradition (as opposed to the individual denominationalism of the RCC) and even to myself, the "burden of proof" lies nearly entirely with those who depart from centuries of WE'ism (I struggle mostly with apostolic succession on this point). One practical application: I tend to accept male-only clergy simply because while I think this could go either way Scripturally, the Church (the ONE, holy, catholic, community of ALL BELIEVERS) for over 1900 years was absolutely, perfectly, in 100% agreement on this.... and the argument for both genders just doesn't OVERWHELM that consensus. I can accept many of Luther's points but BECAUSE he actually points to older and more ecumenical positions (rejecting the individualism of the RC Denomination) and to overwhelming Scriptural teaching - but even there, as I evaluate Lutheranism, Lutherans have the overwhelming "burden of proof" when not standing with what was universally accepted.


Luther said that "humility is the foundation of all good theology." I think humility is not human nature..... egoism, individualism, ME-ism is human nature. "Soul Liberty" I guess Baptists call it. I don't dismiss individual responsibility or the role of the individual entirely but I place the great emphasis on US. Covenant. Community. Family. The PEOPLE/CHILDREN of God. IMO, Luther's STRONG emphasis on that is what kept him from the radical revolutionalism of later "Protestant" movements such as the Anabaptists (parents of the Baptists).


Yup. You've seen this "rant" a LOT from me :smile:



- Josiah



.
 
Last edited:

ImaginaryDay2

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 11, 2015
Messages
3,967
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
I'd not heard the term before, but here in BC the Mennonite Brethren denomination is quite strong. The're overseen (to a degree) by the MB Conference, but they hold no ecclesial power over the individual churches. They can make recommendations for church life and polity, but the individual churches are not bound by them. Consequently, there can be a variety of doctrinal differences between one MB church and another. Traditionally, MB churches are led by men, but there are a few with female "lead pastors". Most adhere to a synergistic/Arminian pov, but there is one MB church not far from me that is quite Calvinist. So (in one sense) it can be a strength where one might find a church that 'fits' with their belief system, but allows them to remain within the MB church.
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2017
Messages
7,102
Age
53
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Married
I'd not heard the term before, but here in BC the Mennonite Brethren denomination is quite strong. The're overseen (to a degree) by the MB Conference, but they hold no ecclesial power over the individual churches. They can make recommendations for church life and polity, but the individual churches are not bound by them. Consequently, there can be a variety of doctrinal differences between one MB church and another. Traditionally, MB churches are led by men, but there are a few with female "lead pastors". Most adhere to a synergistic/Arminian pov, but there is one MB church not far from me that is quite Calvinist. So (in one sense) it can be a strength where one might find a church that 'fits' with their belief system, but allows them to remain within the MB church.
A Calvinist MB church? I must meet my fellow MBers who have let scripture guide their path.
You are quite right about Mennonites as a whole, of which the MB is one distinction. My wife's cousins daughter (follow that?) is a Mennonite pastor (not MB). She is very liberal and someone I cannot agree with.
 

Pedrito

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 21, 2015
Messages
1,032
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
This sort of thing always reminds me of the Calvinist Baptist church I attended for a time some years ago.

They taught that all the saved had been preselected, and would be saved no matter what.

And every Sunday night they had their soul-winning service to which members were encouraged to bring their unsaved friends and acquaintances. The hymns were of the “I’m saved, saved, saved” variety, the sermon dealt with the dire consequences of not making the appropriate decision that night, there was a prolonged altar call, and emotional music emanated from the electronic organ.

Maybe things have changed somewhat these days. I’m not in a position to know.

I’m just glad I’m not in any grossly inconsistent environment now.
 

Lamb

God's Lil Lamb
Community Team
Administrator
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2015
Messages
31,566
Age
57
Gender
Female
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
I have heard of the idea behind "soul liberty" but I suppose I never paid attention that there was a name for it. I think it's because the Baptists are so suspicious of others who might have an inkling of power because of the break from the Catholic church at the Reformation that they chose to go a path where that wouldn't happen again.
 

ImaginaryDay2

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 11, 2015
Messages
3,967
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
A Calvinist MB church? I must meet my fellow MBers who have let scripture guide their path.

Yeah, that was a surprise. I'd attended an Easter 'Stations of the Cross' presentation they'd put on one year - very well done by them - but what struck me was the number of John Piper quotes that were strewn about the walls along the way. They'd also held workshops on Complementarian/Egalitarian marriage with a strong "We're Complementarian and here's why it's biblical" tone to it. They'd presented both sides, but it was pretty evident where they fell.

You are quite right about Mennonites as a whole, of which the MB is one distinction. My wife's cousins daughter (follow that?) is a Mennonite pastor (not MB). She is very liberal and someone I cannot agree with.
.

Nor can I. We might see a number of things differently as far as doctrine, but there are (believe it or not) a number of things that are "non-negotiable" for me. The more liberal, the further I stay away
 
Top Bottom