I had a discussion with a friend today who reminded me that there is a clause in the code of ethics that every clergy person in my denomination is expected to sign that says "I will not accept a position in the American Baptist family unless I am in accord with those traditions and practices; nor will I use my influence to alienate my congregation/constituents or any part thereof from its relationship and support of the denomination. If my convictions change, I will resign my position."
If an individual has signed this document, should they not be held accountable for any actions that encourage a church to leave the denomination? And shouldn't this clause be applicable to executive ministers and region boards who begin a process to pull an entire region from the family?
Obviously, there are those who would say that the denomination has strayed from its traditions and practices but does that negate an ethical commitment that has been made and signed? It seems to me that the ethical action for those who feel that the denomination has lost its moorings would be to quietly resign and leave.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Roy,
Most of those on the right feel the force of the ethical quandary you describe. This is not the place to discuss how some of them deal with it. It does not, however, apply in the same way to the regional EMs. Under the current Covenant of Relations, any signatory may withdraw from the Covenant at any time. In other words, PSW may vote to exit the CofR by the very means prescribed by the document as appropriate.
Dennis E. McFadden
Dennis,
I've been thinking about this... while it is true that any signatory may withdraw from the covenenat of relations at any time, this is also true for an individual congregation. The ethical quandry comes when a person in leadership uses their position to advocate disolving the covenant... at that point I think it applies equally to an exec as to a pastor.
Post a Comment