Chapter One – Outlining The Problem  

Why Are Denominations Being Ignored?

Why do governments and industry prefer local area networks of churches to denominations? Why are missionary candidates often wary about joining denominational missions? Why are Christian schools and hospitals increasingly choosing to associate in interdenominational networks rather than along denominational lines? Here are a few of the more obvious reasons:

How Long Has This Been Going On For?

The movements for Christian unity began late last century were given impetus by John Mott and David Du Plessis and gathered momentum after World War 2 when the Billy Graham Crusades got churches working together for a common cause and Christians learned how much they had in common. In my home state of Queensland the Brethren, Churches of Christ and Baptist churches have been at the forefront of inter-denominational missions. Their denominational structures of networked autonomous local congregations have certainly contributed to the easy adoption of inter-denominational practices. Strict, creedal, formal denominationalism was eroded and this wave ended in mergers of similar but struggling denominations the largest of which was the formation of the Uniting Church from the combined Methodist, Presbyterian and Congregational churches. Still the denominational metaphor was intact, the denominations did not dissolve into networks they combined into new and “more sensible” denominations. This first wave was based on the interpretation of John 17 (Jesus prayer for unity) as being organic and structural unity. The second wave disputed this and saw unity as "koinonia" rowing a boat together, the common cause. 

The “second wave” that I observed was “cautious networking” and was three fold. Firstly came the formation of the inter-denominational Brisbane College of Theology where most denominations have their clergy trained through the same body albeit with denominational distinctives intact. Secondly churches in small country towns were combining for evening services and occasional mission projects. And thirdly the Churches Working Together initiative of the mainline denominations brought pulpit sharing and the occasional combined service to Catholic, Anglican, Uniting and Lutheran churches. It also saw cooperation in local area networks to achieve goals in pastoral care, education and social services. The denominational metaphor was being replaced by the metaphor of local area network of believers in a very cautious fashion. This was helped along by a “theology of the city” which saw the city/local area as the organising unit . This theology can get quite complex and to explain it simply it is based partly on the fact that the epistles of Paul were written to local areas not individual churches or denominations. 

The “third wave” I observed came from two sources. Firstly the Vineyard movement with its network of independent churches seeking God in a particularly appealing way for many. It had a new and attractive flavour about it and while it did not catch on in a very big way in Australia it created a hunger for a similar way of being Christian here. The Crosslinks network of independent churches seems to have its genesis at least partly in the Vineyard movement and the gentle management philosophy of the late John Wimber. Secondly the task of churches reaching youth created a crisis that has had three remarkable expressions. Firstly Scripture Union came up with the idea of placing church funded chaplains in government high schools. To get this past the State Education Department which did not want denominationally biased chaplains Local Chaplaincy Committees had to be formed representing all the churches around a given high school . They then funded the worker in the school who was recruited by Scripture Union and approved by the LCC on negotiated guidelines that were also approved by the Education Department. So far in Queensland over 70 such chaplaincies have been formed and this is increasing at a fast rate . Churches are working together in local area networks and funding a common worker. While this is still quite peripheral to church life in Queensland it has required much negotiation and cooperation so that the process of chaplaincy formation has been a huge exercise in trust building between local churches. The second youth-related issue has been Religious Education in schools which used to be denominationally based with each denomination for instruction. Commonly smaller denominations banded together as "Other Protestant Denominations. " .With women RE teachers entering the workforce and increasingly busy local clergy it became impossible to find enough teachers so denominations did the sensible thing and started grouping together a bit. Eventually the idea of a common curriculum emerged negotiated between churches in the local areas such as Townsville West. Initially denominational distrust was at a high level and it took 6 months or more for these agreements to be put together. Last month a new Townsville West agreement was put together in a single meeting. The third youth related development was an outcome of the Youth For Christ combined youth rallies of the 70’s and 80’s and the Youth Alive rallies in Pentecostal circles. Youth who met at these rallies networked along the lines of affinity and friendship and not along the lines of doctrine. Youth began to move around each others churches at such a speed that all youth ministry has become essentially inter-denominational. Youth pastors are now getting together regularly and networking frequently partly to keep track of their charges and partly to organise combined events. Denominations have little meaning in the world of youth work. In fact they come close to being nonsensical. Its one huge youth network - at least here in Townsville.

Other factors have certainly contributed to the collapse of the Berlin Wall of denominationalism. These factors include ridicule and persecution where Christians have suffered together in the face of a hostile world. Even the mild anti-Christian stance of the media has been a force making Christians feel that they are more together than apart. Christian bookstores, common books, commentaries and lexicons and Bibles, Christian radio and common Christian music have all been factors. Few denominations realise how close they have become. I lecture at two bible colleges one very Baptist and non-charismatic and the other very Pentecostal. They are under the impression that they are “totally different”. Yet my lecture notes on Hebrews or Church History at the Pentecostal college would be perfectly acceptable at the Baptist college since both colleges use exactly the same references, notes and textbooks. If I changed the title page of the notes no-one would be the wiser. 

When Will The Battle For The Denominations Begin?

In management literature they have gone from being future-ists to “present-ists’ and are asking “what unperceived change has already occurred that will define the future?” The collapse of denominations is such a change. Its happened. The battle is over. This book is in the past tense. It examples are from yesterday. I am not predicting anything I am rather describing what is now and trying to find the way forward. There will be no “battle for the denominations”, no rearguard action to preserve the past; the troops have moved on – and in droves. So my question at the head of this section is (deliberately) misleading. The discourse of cooperation has been normalised and the discourse of denominationalism has been marginalised. In other words when people talk in denominational terms now they sound weird and behind the times. It is no longer normal to be denominational any more than it is normal to be racist. Increasingly denominationalism is being viewed as undesirable and even pathological within Christian circles. It is certainly no longer the favoured way of being Christian. 

What Has Replaced/Will Replace Denominations As The Means of Organising The Faith and Life Of The Churches?

Local area networks of churches will help us find faith and fellowship and task focused associations will organise our schools, hospitals, missionary societies and theological colleges. Larger networks will exist in matters of doctrine and styles of worship and even higher level organisations will co-ordinate the efforts of the schools, missionary societies etc. This has largely happened but is still happening hence the time ambiguity in the header. 

But Surely Some Tasks Will Still Belong To Denominational Structures Like The Training, Ordaining & Appointment of Clergy.

  1. The training of clergy is already being done inter-denominationally in all major denominations and a B.Th. from any one college will be accepted by the other denominations. Candidates moving between denominations generally only have to take a few subjects on denominational distinctives.
  2. The appointment of clergy. Many Baptist churches and all independent churches simply advertise in the Christian newspapers and magazines when a pastor is needed or promote an elder in the church. Such appointments are just as functional as those made by denominational panels and in many cases even better as the participating church has more say and thus greater “ownership” of the decision.
  3. Ordination is under fire and being seen as officious meddling in many cases. It is either never instituted (Churches of Christ) diminished in significance (many Third Wave churches) or relegated to the local church. Independent churches ordain simply by the laying on of hands of the elders in the congregation. Pastors so ordained seem to function just as well as those ordained by a bishop.
  4. Discipline of errant churches is another supposedly denominational function. However it is simply not being done by the denominations and when it is done it is often done poorly. Even this can be done by networks. A successful restoration of a church in error was achieved when a network of pastors who prayed together helped one of their number back on track. No denominational “heavies” were involved and in fact they were remarkably absent from the process. Friends can help each other be accountable and to stay on track as “iron sharpens iron” and networked clergy are far less likely to fall than often isolated denominational clergy. Similarly correction of doctrine is being done more by Christian authors and Christian media than by pronouncements from denominational HQ. Creeds have become minimalist nine point affairs and something of the magnitude of the Westminster Confession would not be contemplated by any denomination today. Even in Catholic circles canon law is being increasingly resisted or ignored.
  5. The sense of continuity, history and belonging that denominations provide is being replaced by allegiance to the Scriptures and to personal experiences of God. Allegiance can be to the local area network or the task focused organisation just as much as it can to a denomination. I find many people who describe themselves as YWAM-ers for instance and find their allegiance there rather than in events in Europe’s past. Many Australians find it awkward to have an allegiance to a denomination like the Lutherans where the history is that of Germany in the 1500’s. Perhaps that is why the Lutheran church in Australia has barely spread beyond the German sub-culture.
  6. There is thus no function of denominational structures that I can think of that cannot be done as well or better by local area networks of churches or task focused associations. Hierarchical denominational structures are simply unnecessary.  

 
Ok John, Back Off, You Are Sounding A Bit Too Hostile Here… Denominations Have Performed A Very Important Role And Will Well Into The Forseeable Future and Besides Thousands of People Have Died Fighting For Those Denominational Distinctives and Ways of Being Christian….

I thought you would say that! Lets deal with the “martyrs” argument first. People have died fighting over all sorts of things. People have died fighting over their favourite football team. Probably someone has died fighting over a bus ticket. This just indicates the presence of a vicious tribalism that is prepared to kill those who believe and live differently. It says nothing about the rightness or wrongness of those so killed or the structures they used to organise themselves. That is not to say that such deaths were unworthy or in vain. However they should not dictate how Christians organise themselves today. The structures we use should be the best possible structures that help us with the following top priority tasks amongst others:

  1. Loving God with all our heart, soul, mind and strength.
  2. Loving our neighbours as ourselves.
  3. Developing a vital Christian community that lives the abundant victorious Christian life together in peace.
  4. Fulfilling God’s calling to make disciples of all nations.
  5. Undertaking ministries of mercy and compassion to a hurting world.

Local area networks of churches undertook the first three of those tasks very capably during the first century AD and roving task focused missionary bands such as the one Paul led were responsible for evangelism, mission and the collection for the starving saints in Jerusalem – the last two tasks on our list. Denominations were not needed then and these five tasks were done as well or better than they have been done since. Denominational structures were never put in place by the apostles who were ‘network hubs” rather than archbishops and popes. Denominational ways of being are a mixed blessing promoting stability on one hand and allowing tribalism in the body of Christ in the other. Their effect in stifling the more unusual but sometimes more vital aspects of the faith has been a high price to pay for order. When God orders nature it is with great variety and a harmony between the species. He did not plant all trees in rows or say “I like petunias therefore all flowers will be petunias”. The animals are not filed from A-Z or kept isolated from each other. God’s order is “beyond bureaucracy”. Therefore if the Church is to reflect God’s order it will be “beyond bureaucracy” and the traditional forms of denominational structures. Denominations are often half of the solution, an expedient structure created during a revival or reformation. There are better ways of organising ourselves that we can move towards. We now need to take the next step into new ways of being Christian that go beyond denominations.