Baptist Church Cooperation, Part 7

Read Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, and Part 6.

The Ad Hoc Model

Baptists have worked together to accomplish a variety of goals. In order to work together, they have created different kinds of organizations and erected different sorts of institutions. Some Baptists, however, have questioned whether all of the institutionalism is necessary or even healthy. They have reasoned that most of the work can be left to individual people or congregations. They have suggested that where Baptists must cooperate on a scale that is larger than the individual local church, their cooperation should take the form of simple, ad hoc endeavors. Few or no permanent agencies or institutions should be created outside of the local church.

Certainly Baptists do cooperate in ad hoc ways. Sometimes these occasional efforts are prompted by individuals, and other times they are prompted by churches. For example, a group of pastors may decide to pool the resources of their churches in order to put together a conference to address a particular theme. A particular church may appeal to sister congregations to help in meeting the urgent needs of a missionary. These forms of ad hoc cooperation occur regularly.

In 2005, Hurricane Katrina devastated parts of the Gulf Coast. Members of Morning Star Baptist Church of Rockford, Illinois, saw an opportunity for ministry to the victims of the disaster. The church, which is not large, made an appeal to other Christians and churches for help as it aided the victims. Later on, the church requested assistance again as it attempted to minister to those touched by the mass shooting at the University of Northern Illinois. In both instances, other Baptists responded to the appeals for help. These were genuine examples of cooperative efforts. No permanent structures, agencies, or institutions were erected, however. When the job was done, no ongoing organization was left over.

The ad hoc model offers distinct advantages as a form of Baptist cooperation. The first is that, under many circumstances, ad hoc cooperation can be evoked quickly and can be directed toward immediate, pressing concerns. No policies and procedures have to be followed, no boards have to be convinced, no meetings have to be called, and no votes have to be taken (except the meetings and votes of individual churches, when they choose to participate). This process makes for very flexible organization.

A second advantage of the ad hoc model is that only those who are interested in the immediate goal are likely to get involved. For that reason, the people who are directing the endeavor are likely to be very responsive to the wishes and suggestions of the cooperating churches and individuals. Everything is “up close and personal,” and for that reason the ad hoc model tends to create a high degree of immediate accountability.

Third, the ad hoc model creates no enduring organizations. Without organizations, there are no wheels to be turned, no strings to be pulled, and no ladders to be climbed. The possibilities for political struggles and power plays would seem to be minimized. This advantage may be the most important of them all.

Still, the ad hoc model also presents some disadvantages—and, as a matter of fact, some of the advantages turn out to be more ephemeral than they might seem. The reason is simple: no cooperation ever occurs without organization. The ad hoc model eliminates permanent institutions, but in the place of institutions it looks to entrepreneurial leadership. That is not bad, but it does result in two consequences for those who limit themselves to this form of organization.

First, entrepreneurial endeavors often lack the stability and stamina to accomplish very large or long-term objectives. Almost by definition, sustained efforts require sustained organization. If the effort goes on long enough or grows large enough, what starts out as ad hoc organization will almost certainly transform itself into permanent institutionalism. If it does not, the effort will begin to falter.

Second, some individuals are better equipped to lead entrepreneurial efforts than others. People naturally begin to look to these individuals as the ones who consistently initiate and promote ad hoc efforts. Even if no permanent structures are created, power will tend to gravitate toward the entrepreneurs. Even in ad hoc and informal relationships, a pecking order will develop. Ultimately, even the ad hoc model involves a system, however informal, that can be manipulated. Power can still be asserted and even abused. In other words, ad hoc organization is not a magic bullet against ecclesiastical politics.

In fact, precisely because no structure exists, restraining the abuse of power may become more difficult. If you don’t have a permanent organization, then you don’t have mechanisms through which you can pursue discipline or censure against abusive leadership. Where no offices exist, no one can be removed from office, no matter how flagrant the abuses.

The ad hoc model certainly has its place. It is one way of implementing the New Testament pattern that reveals Christians and churches working together. It is certainly not the only way, however. And it is no warranty against ecclesiastical politics and power mongering.

The Waiting Soul

William Cowper (1731-1800)

Breathe from the gentle South, O Lord,
And cheer me from the North;
Blow on the treasures of thy word,
And call the spices forth!

I wish, thou know’st, to be resign’d,
And wait with patient hope;
But hope delay’d fatigues the mind,
And drinks the spirit up.

Help me to reach the distant goal,
Confirm my feeble knee;
Pity the sickness of a soul
That faints for love of thee.

Cold as I feel this heart of mine,
Yet since I feel it so—
It yields some hope of life divine
Within, however low.

I seem forsaken and alone,
I hear the lion roar;
And ev’ry door is shut but one,
And that is mercy’s door.

There, till the dear Deliv’rer come,
I’ll wait with humble pray’r;
And when he calls his exile home,
The Lord shall find me there.

This essay is by Dr. Kevin T. Bauder, president of Central Baptist Theological Seminary (Plymouth, MN). Not every professor, student, or alumnus of Central Seminary necessarily agrees with every opinion that it expresses.