Dual Alligment

I could not be a part of a church that was duly aligned sending designated monies to both the SBC and the CBF.

 

Same here.

 

Yes.

We participate with the SBC (Southern Baptist Convention), the CBF (Cooperative Baptist Fellowship), and the BGCT (Baptist General Convention of Texas).

Frankly, I'm not terribly happy with any of the above groups.

We also participate with the Tarrant Baptist Association and have recently formed a close working relationship with a non-denominational, primarily African-American, congregation to minister to the needs of our broader community. It has been quite a blessing for both congregations and we are learning from each other and building strong relationships.

I could care less about exclusive alignments. In fact, I would consider it more of a liability than an advantage.

 

Sounds awful. Built-in schism.

Amos 3:3 Can two walk together, except they be agreed?

 

No. Our church is not affiliated with any association or convention. We can "dually align" as we please, though. That is, if we deem the church 5 miles down the road or in the county seat to be of the same faith and order we can fellowship with them if they are willing to fellowship with us. (That is, we look at the faith and practice of the church rather than the alignment of the church; of course, there are some alignments which would put up a red flag to us.)

Many denominational leaders are antagonistic toward dual alignment, and some groups even disallow it (I believe the conservative Missouri State SBC Convention is that way). One of the more common dual alignments I have seen is Southern Baptist Convention & National Baptist Convention. I am aware of one dual alignment in our region where a church is in both the Southern Baptists of Texas Convention and Baptist Missionary Association of Texas. I think there are a number of churches that have joined the SBTC while continuing to participate in the Baptist General Convention of Texas.

Alignments that cross racial or linguistic boundaries tend to be more "approved of" by leaders. It seems like that leaders are prone to see other forms of dual alignment as a type of disloyalty. To me that is putting loyalty to the creature above loyalty to the Creator.

I will not say that I would never join a dually aligned church, because I do not consider such a church automatically unsound. But my preference is a church that is "unaligned" with any association or convention, which then aligns with other local churches as circumstances allow.

 

The church I serve in is dually aligned with the BMA (Baptist Missionary Association) and the SBC. We aligned with the SBC about two years ago now and have really enjoyed a lot of the new and more supported resources that the SBC has compared to the BMA.

 

Michael, the church I mentioned is in East Texas. It seems especially since the formation of the SBTC that many in this conservative state convention and BMAT seem to think they have a lot in common.

I know that the Arkansas SBC doesn't have a new convention, but is it possibly perceived as pretty conservative and not that much different from the BMAA?

 

My church is dual aligned with the CBF and SBC. I've found that most members today don't place much importance on that or even understand what it means. At one point we were at the forefront of the CBF movement.