March 17, 2005
The Problem of the “Community Church”
More and more I talk with people who have joined a local “community church” – in other words a church not affiliated with any specific denomination. This seems a logical next step for the protestant movement, since it allows greater individual ability to interpret Scripture without oversight, but I think there are a few issues that are especially problematic in this type of church.
First, it’s important to note the reasoning behind creating a community church. I once attended a very large Southern Baptist church where the pastor served several times as president of the Southern Baptist Association. The Association as a group achieves two main objectives as far as this discussion goes: (1) it forces member churches to abide by a common creed or doctrine and (2) it collects dues and helps expand the association/church membership. The pastor I spoke of recently left his church and formed a new “community” church. This allows him to remove both of these stipulations, which is problematic in my mind.
In other articles, I’ve discussed whether it is ever okay to split off and form your own church, so I’ll leave that alone here (after noting that I think it is wrong to intentionally cause division within the Christian community). But splitting off to form a community church causes other issues. The biggest issue involves doctrine. Whether protestants realize it or not, their beliefs are guided by a specific doctrine that they trust in. For example, sola scriptura would clearly be a doctrinal belief of virtually all protestants. And individual denominations have other specifics that comprise their doctrine of belief. For example, the Southern Baptist Association believes that infant baptism is wrong, but the Methodist church believes it is correct. In other words, each denomination has a pretty clear doctrine that all member churches must abide by.
This is not true in a community church. In fact, in the community church the doctrine is whatever the current pastor preaches from the pulpit. And there is virtually no limit on what the pastor may develop as doctrine provided he can convince church membership that he is correct. A new pastor effectively means a new doctrine – it’s inevitable that some differences will exist in their two interpretations of Scripture.
In effect, this takes the division of Christianity to a new, unprecedented level. No longer do we have multiple denominations (who have the ability to come together and discuss their faith), we now have a new, unique denomination in virtually every city, all preaching their own, personal version of Christianity. It is very difficult to engage this type of church because typically only the pastor knows what the church really believes (and that could easily change over time).
Personally, I’ve heard some very odd teachings purported to be from Scripture that have been taught in these small churches. As the population grows, more become susceptible to whatever motive the pastor has in mind. The argument can be made that this is where Christian churches first began teaching that homosexuality and abortion are acceptable. At this point, the average Christian (I think all will agree) doesn’t know enough about his/her Bible or the history of Christianity to argue with someone who knows enough to twist it to their own use. It also moves us closer to a model where each individual Christian has their own set of doctrines, whether realistic or not, and thus puts themselves as the sole authoritative interpreter of Scripture (relativism taken to its full potential).
I think I’m surprised there hasn’t been more criticism aimed at these churches by protestants as well as Catholics. As they grow, they are tending to take members from other protestant churches and effectively change the belief system of these individuals. On a side note, I’m also surprised at the number of Christians who don’t mind changing their beliefs – I know of a friend who liked a new church and began attending, even though that church taught infant baptism, when he believed it was wrong. This apathy toward doctrine is why we are now seeing the rise of these community churches.
Let me know what you think – especially if you are protestant.
God bless,
Jay
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Jay,
You'll be surprised to find on TBN and at various churches the rebuking of certain denominations and their toleration for that which unholy. For example, the toleration of the sin of homosexuality. Yet, I am sure you can agree that, it would take some serious twisting of Scripture to say that God condones it. If it had to with homosexuality, God was calling it an abomination, not to mention the fact that God made it man and woman..not man and another man or woman with another woman. Nonetheless, you speak of a minority group of Christians. You make it sound like they make up most of the protestants that exist today. This is far from true and you know this. You are right, some who are ignorant of the Scriptures may teach improperly or follow incorrectly. With issues such as homosexuality or abortion being condoned, these churches that do such a thing make up a small minority. If your argument is that in using the Bible as the paramount authority for matters pertaining to the church leads to division, fine. But then would I be correct in saying that TRADITIONS of the priesthood leads to child molestation? Of course I would be wrong in making that statement, because I do believe that the RC priests that did such acts, make up a small minority. Just like these small churches you speak of, make up the small minority of Chritians.
God Bless
Posted by: SandT@cctv.org at March 17, 2005 09:01 PMSandT, may I make a wager with you?
I predict that within 38 years the small minority of Christians who promote homosexuality will become a large majority in every Church. Meanwhile the Roman Catholic Church will be the only one not changings its teachings. In 1930 a small minority of Christians said in defiance of all others that contraception was sometimes okay. In 1968 Humanae Vitae stunned the world by making the Roman Catholic Church the only Christian organization NOT to embrace contraception.
When contraception was being debated scholars on both sides of the issue could agree on only one thing: that the arguments for contraception applied equally well for homosexual acts and that the arguments against contraception applied equally well against homosexual acts.
If I am correct, please reconsider the Roman Catholic Church the visible manifestation of the Church Jesus intended to build. If I am incorrect I will reconsider the trust that I have put into the Infallible Magisterium. It was the Church's demonstrable correctness on the issues of abortion, contraception, euthanasia, and capital punishment that ultimately led me to decide to trust Roman Catholic teaching before understanding and agreeing with it. 50000 Protestant denominations should be able to produce at least one organization that could get four yes-no questions correct (you'd think that only 16 would really be needed).
Posted by: Broken Record at March 18, 2005 12:22 AMBroken,
Number 1, I'll make that wager with you. So...on March 18, 2043, we will both log on to this site and see.
And could you please tell me the source of the number you have? 50,000 denominations? Where do you get that number? Plese shoe me where, tell me.
God Bless
Posted by: SandT@cctv.org at March 18, 2005 01:55 PMDear Jay,
I am a protestant who has been to two community churches. The feeling at those churches was one of religious acceptance. The mood was that denominations did not matter. The problem I found with one of them was that it appeared to be more of a pulpit for the RNC than for Christ. Politics were a big part of every sermon. The preachers were good speakers, but they relied too much on films, powerpoint slides and other multimedia. If they weren't talking about why good Christians should support conservative politics, they were talking about how much money they needed to raise to buy a bigger complex. The choir was on a stage with a curtain that let up and down. After the service, the clergy were no where to be found. It was hard to feel the Holy Spirit there.
The other community church I attended was much smaller with maybe 150 members. It was very cozy, evangelical and accepting of all kinds of people. Anyone from punk rockers to school teachers would attend, and the congregation was very young. The problem with that church was that is had cult-like devotion from members who heard the same message over and over. The central mission was to recruit more members from college campuses. After a couple of visits I stopped going there because it started to look like a cult. Both churches were very territorial and seemed to be in a mad dash to get bigger, no matter what.
Posted by: Alice at June 22, 2005 03:17 AM
