When "Baptist" Means Nothing: A Call to Baptist Clarity and Conviction

The cultural pragmatism and theological shallowness that mark our time are shaping churches into an undefined evangelical blob. Visit non-denominational, Pentecostal, Mennonite, and many other churches from different traditions, and increasingly, they look, feel and operate the same. And Baptists have not been immune.

Some see this as progress—a welcome erasing of denominational differences in the name of unity. Unity is good, but only when it is grounded in truth. The growing uniformity we see today is not the fruit of deepening theological conviction; it is the result of pragmatism and doctrinal drift. And when conviction fades, labels eventually become meaningless.

You can walk into a church that calls itself Baptist and find little that connects it to what has historically been understood as Baptist life and practice. That is a bold claim, but it needs to be said plainly: a name without convictions is a lie.

To carry “Baptist” in the name of a church—or to belong to a Baptist convention—without any real understanding, care, or intention of upholding Baptist convictions is to carry a label you have no intention of honouring. Over time, this empties the name of its meaning. It creates confusion, and it becomes a roadblock for those who are convictionally Baptist and trying to live and build according to those convictions.

Let me expand briefly on the problem.

Many churches have “Baptist” in the name, but:

No regenerate membership.

One of the defining marks of Baptist life is the conviction that the local church should be composed of regenerate members—those who have professed faith in Christ and given credible evidence of new life. This conviction is what drives believers’ baptism. Baptism is administered to those who profess faith because the church itself is meant to be a gathered body of believers. A Baptist church with little or no meaningful membership, or no concern for who belongs to the body, is not functioning as a Baptist church.

No discipline.

Regenerate membership necessarily leads to church discipline. If we believe the church is a covenant community of professing believers, then we also believe the church has the responsibility to guard its life and witness. Discipline is not harshness; it is pastoral care and congregational responsibility. Where there is no discipline, regenerate membership becomes a slogan rather than a reality.

Casual ordinances.

Historically, Baptists have held a serious view of the ordinances. We may have intra-mural discussions about their precise theological meaning, but there has never been serious disagreement that baptism and the Lord’s Supper belong to the church and are tied to the life of its members. When the ordinances become casual, detached from membership, or treated as optional add-ons to church life, we are no longer living in continuity with Baptist conviction.

Celebrity or centralized leadership.

Baptists have historically held that Christ rules His church through His Word. We appoint elders to lead, and we practice congregationalism, believing that the gathered members hold final earthly authority under Christ. Yet many churches that call themselves Baptist are effectively built around one lead pastor who holds all real power. The church becomes “his” church. Congregational polity exists on paper, but monarchy exists in practice.

Continuationist authority structures.

With respect to our Pentecostal and charismatic brothers and sisters, Baptists have historically insisted that the structure and direction of the church are governed by Scripture alone. Our churches are not to be guided by impressions, prophecies, or “words from the Lord” functioning as directional authority. The historic Baptist conviction is that Christ governs His church through His written Word, and that the Spirit works through that Word, not as a parallel stream of revelation guiding the church’s decisions. Where impressions and revelations begin to function as governing authority, Baptist polity is quietly displaced.

No ecclesiology.

This may be the root of many of the issues above. Increasingly, churches operate without a clear doctrine of the church—what the church is, who belongs to it, who governs it, and what it exists to do. Many pastors and planters show little interest in Baptist ecclesiology at all. Churches may have a theology of salvation, a theology of worship style, and a theology of mission, but no theology of the church itself. Without that, the local church becomes a gathering, a network, a brand, or a platform—but not a defined covenant community.

----

Historically, Baptists have held one of the most clearly defined ecclesiologies in Protestantism: regenerate membership, congregational authority, meaningful discipline, ordinances tied to the life of the church, and a strong emphasis on the local church as the primary context of Christian life. When ecclesiology disappears, Baptist identity collapses quickly—because Baptist identity is largely ecclesiological.

This is not about nostalgia, nor about claiming that one group of Christians is inherently better than another. It is a diagnosis and a call to clarity. We need a Baptist recovery.

I am convinced that Baptist distinctives are not arbitrary traditions but biblical convictions, and that churches shaped by conviction rather than pragmatism are healthier, more faithful, and more useful to the kingdom than the generic, undefined churches that increasingly fill our landscape.

May God help us recover clarity, and may He grant us unity that is grounded not in vagueness or convenience, but in truth.

Nino Marques