I think many Churches of Christ are caught in a dilemma that they don’t even know will have a long-term effect on them. See if you agree with me.
Prior to the last quarter century, Churches of Christ viewed as part of their core identity their non-denominationalism. In fact, the earliest roots of the Restoration Movement in the U.S. were a reaction to the fact that denominationalism had become the means of excluding those from one’s fellowship who had different creedal beliefs. By laying aside all human creeds and denominational organizations, restorationists believed they were more perfectly practicing the unity of the Spirit in the one Body of Christ.
During the 1970s, many in Churches of Christ began to believe that regardless of our theology, our practice had become denominational. Churches of Christ had in practice adopted a brand that was defined by its own traditions and that brand was used to exclude rather than include.
Whereas in the sixties, we argued over whether to write “church of Christ” with a capital C or not, by the 70s, those debates were over, and we had become totally tolerant of talking about “Church of Christ” preachers, “Church of Christ” colleges, “Church of Christ” elderships, buildings, JOY buses, and when asked about personal membership “Church of Christ” was the only acceptable answer. The term “Church of Christ” no longer was just a descriptive name borrowed from Romans 16:16, but rather a brand name and trademark of a very particular group of Christians—the very definition of denominationalism.
Interestingly enough, about the same time period, two new developments began to surface in the broader Christian community: a number of new non-denominational groups like Calvary Chapel, The Vineyard, and The Way were started. Also the whole Bible church and community church movements flourished. These were typically individual congregations very loosely associated with other churches, if at all.
As these independent non-denominational churches became more numerous, they were seen to be taking advantage of growing tolerance among evangelical Christians in particular. Congregations of mainline denominations, seeing the tide moving away from denominationalism, began changing their congregational names to more generic names. New names like Harvest Church, Covenant Church, New Life Church, etc., replaced old names and left old denominational identifications to very small fonts in parentheses, if visible at all. Some of these churches quit their denominational organizations, but most just changed names.
So as I see it, about the time the Churches of Christ became comfortable about being one among many churches—at least among evangelical churches (although I myself think we are very inconsistent to only identify with evangelical churches), those same denominations started moving away from that very position and towards the non-denominational position that Churches of Christ were abandoning.
Here are my conclusions for Churches of Christ:
- Churches of Christ need to return to their roots and recover their non-denominational theology. What a great opportunity to be what we have historically claimed to be, a unity movement. What a great time to preach and actively embrace the unity in the Body of Christ.
- Churches of Christ need to quit trying to imitate “successful” churches and decide who God wants them to be and what He wants them to teach. Turning to market research for our identity has two big drawbacks: It leaves us being a lesser imitation—a knock-off—of an original, and it means we are always catching up to the “latest trends” often after those who established those trends have moved on.
- The highly autonomous congregational approach to church is robbing Churches of Christ of the power in community, in fellowship, in “many members but one body!” We must learn to be more collaborative, to look for true fellowship in the work of the Gospel, and to welcome partnerships with other members of the Body. Isn’t that the only way to be a whole and healthy Body!
Watch for more on this last point later.