s/o of How to Find a Church: An honest question (CC related)

[Xuzi]

Please understand that I mean no offense or veiled judgement or condemnation in asking this question. The "How do you find a church?" thread prompted me to find out the answer to it, if there is one.

 

It wasn't until my adult years that I ever encountered the term "church shopping". I was born and raised in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, and we have a uniformity in doctrine in all congregations so that you can step into an LDS chapel in California, Canada, or Chile and find the exact same message being preached. The same type of baptism, the same type of Sacrament (what we call Communion), the same order in the leadership, the same type of youth programs, the same type of fellowshipping, the same type of worship-service, etc. etc. There may be some differences in the "feel" of the congregation, depending on it's democraphics and such, but the doctrine is the same. An LDS church is an LDS church no matter where in the world you are. It wasn't until I was an adult that I realized not all denominations functioned this way.

 

And my question is: Why? Is there a purpose served by allowing some variances between congregations that I'm not seeing as an outsider? Do some denominations not have as many hard-and-fast standards for what can and cannot be preached from a pulpit that bears it's name? Is there a mechanism in place to address a Pastor or Preacher or Priest who might start preaching things that are out-of-line with the denominations interpretation of Scripture? I'm honestly curious. :)

[kokotg]

Well, there are different types of church governance. Some denominations are much more accountable to a central authority than others. My church is Disciples of Christ, and before that I attended a United Church of Christ....both of these denominations have congregational government, which means they have very little, if any, accountability to a central authority. They're also, probably not coincidentally, non-creedal. There is a national organization in both cases, but its function is a lot different than it would be in a more hierarchical denomination.

[kokotg]

As far as why....well, I think it's kind of like how I feel when someone asks why I homeschool. Why not? I don't see school as the default, so I don't see homeschooling as making a decision against something else. I don't see denominational uniformity in doctrine or central government that controls things at the congregational level as the default either. There are any number of reasons why people might prefer congregational government. It gives congregations more power and freedom to do things the way they feel is best for them. As far as your last question...as far as I know, there's no process for complaining to a central authority at either a DOC or UCC church if you don't agree with what the pastor's saying...but again, both denoms are non-creedal, so there's a lot of room for questioning and disagreement about theology. If you don't like what the pastor says, you'd...find another church.

[freethinkermama]

Please understand that I mean no offense or veiled judgement or condemnation in asking this question. The "How do you find a church?" thread prompted me to find out the answer to it, if there is one.

 

It wasn't until my adult years that I ever encountered the term "church shopping". I was born and raised in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, and we have a uniformity in doctrine in all congregations so that you can step into an LDS chapel in California, Canada, or Chile and find the exact same message being preached. The same type of baptism, the same type of Sacrament (what we call Communion), the same order in the leadership, the same type of youth programs, the same type of fellowshipping, the same type of worship-service, etc. etc. There may be some differences in the "feel" of the congregation, depending on it's democraphics and such, but the doctrine is the same. An LDS church is an LDS church no matter where in the world you are. It wasn't until I was an adult that I realized not all denominations functioned this way.

 

And my question is: Why? Is there a purpose served by allowing some variances between congregations that I'm not seeing as an outsider? Do some denominations not have as many hard-and-fast standards for what can and cannot be preached from a pulpit that bears it's name? Is there a mechanism in place to address a Pastor or Preacher or Priest who might start preaching things that are out-of-line with the denominations interpretation of Scripture? I'm honestly curious. :)

 

Just my point of view, and surely many will disagree, and I'm not saying I have the only right answer. . .but here's one possibility.

 

Between many of the denominations, there are many little differences that one may be willing to overlook if the basics are the same. Or, as some like to say, "Don't major on the minors." Don't get worked up over the differences, if the major things are more important.

 

Some denominations differ on the method of baptism-pouring, sprinking, dunking. But if the reason for baptism is the same, they may overlook their own baptismal preference, for the sake of the basic, importance issue they share.

 

Or, I know folks who come from backgrounds that say women shouldn't be in leadership, but wind up in churches with women in leadership because compared with everything else, they like that church and can overlook the little issue of women's position. (If, indeed, they find that to be a little issue).

 

For example, I went to an Independent Baptist church when I was born again, but when I went to college, I began to go to a non-denom church because there were more folks "like me" there, and the denominational differences weren't that great. Then, when I married, we left the church (because the leadership was strongly against para-church ministries--funny because almost everyone in the church was related to the CCC or Navigator or Intervarsity collegiate groups, as were we) and began to to go an E-Free church. It was much the same, and the only differences were theological, and weren't considered "majors." We believed in the same means to salvation, and the same beliefs about God and Jesus, so wherever one stood on the means of baptism, or whether one was Armenian or Calvinist, it wasn't a big issue. When we moved to a different part of the country, we wound up in a Southern Baptist church because it had a great children's ministry, even though we disagreed with some of the "minor" beliefs. It wouldn't keep us from being full members, they were just differences in little issues.

 

Uh, which is not to say everyone would be happy to move between denominations, or that they are ALL very close, but. . .

 

I'm rambling.

 

A lot.

 

Does this make any sense?

 

Must get more sleep.

 

Sorry :)

[lionfamily1999]

And my question is: Why? Is there a purpose served by allowing some variances between congregations that I'm not seeing as an outsider?

Well, first "allowing" is a sticky wicket. I'm Baptist. It's not that we are "allowed" to start as many local churches as we want, so much as we can if we want to and the Baptist convention can take or leave the new ones. IOW, no one is in control (or could curb) the number of churches opened. You don't like the local churches, you start your own.

As for purpose, well you have younger congregations, older congregations, more conservative, less conservative, and a ton of other differences.

Do some denominations not have as many hard-and-fast standards for what can and cannot be preached from a pulpit that bears it's name?

 

For us (Baptists) there are hard and fast rules, and there are grey areas. There are also Baptists that stick to some of the hard and fast and drop others. Really, I don't know how it could be controlled. You can call your church Baptist, it's not like copyright infringment. You can't sue (as far as I know).

 

Is there a mechanism in place to address a Pastor or Preacher or Priest who might start preaching things that are out-of-line with the denominations interpretation of Scripture? I'm honestly curious. :)

In each Baptist church there is, but I'm not sure how the conventions could get involved. Like I said before, if you don't like it you can start your own or go to a different one a few miles away, or you can address it according to your church's bilaws.

[Paige]

With protestants (me), I think it is partly that minor differences in beliefs can be overlooked or ignored in the search for a church home but also in the whole "priesthood of the believer" philosophy. Most denominations have a core of beliefs they affirm, but there is a vast number of minor issues that may not be mentioned or may be interpreted differently. You may find 5 Baptist churches in 1 city with a very wide range of worship styles, activities, outreach programs, and micro-beliefs. I think that is good- everyone can find someplace they feel comfortable with and nobody is judged as wrong. There are several churches we visited, for instance, that were not a good fit for us. I believe they are good churches, however. I also believe that there is absolutely nothing wrong with how they do their services and their beliefs. It is just different. One church's style may appeal to a different type of person than the other church's style. If there was only one "Baptist" church, then so many people who, individually, have slightly different beliefs or comfort levels or even interests will be left out of the church entirely. It is also like the difference between wanting "government schools" that are exactly the same across all 50 states in the United States, vs. local control of schools. The local people know what will work best in their environment and local culture.

[simka2]

This will be a gross oversimplification, but it is my present thought on the issue. The Protestant church has at it's very foundation the concept of Sola Scriptura. When left to scripture alone, humans will naturally come in and fill up the vacume left by the Traditions, and just not call it Tradition.

 

Therefore you are left with each group setting up what they think are the most correct "Traditions" (used in place of induvidual belifes, governing practices, and service structure)

 

When you have a religious structure that has both Holy Scripture and Holy Traditions you have less variance (noticed I didn't say "no" variance). ;)

[Xuzi]

Lots of food for thought. Thank you ladies. :)

[snickelfritz]

My city has a church on every corner ( and leasing schools, libraries, etc...) Choosing a church starts with the majors(salvation issues), continues on with minors (baptism, women's role, etc...), and includes extras such as worship style, how Sunday School is organized, and how the children's ministry is organized.

 

We attended a church for 10 years as a couple, most of that without kids. We agreed with the majors and minors, and they had a wonderful young married ministry. Once we had kids, there were things about the children's programming that we weren't happy with. Change wasn't happening from within, so we found a church that fit the majors AND the minors AND had children's programming in line with what we believed.

Edited March 19, 2011 by snickelfritz

[tntgoodwin]

Well, there are around 30,000 Protestant denominations. There are differences between all of them, some small, and some great. Then there are also non-denominational churches that are basically independent.

Then you have situations that even within a denomination, there are variances between individual churches.

And then you have 2 churches that have the same exact beliefs and theology, but have other differences - like worship styles, size, ministries offered, preaching styles, etc.

Unfortunately, my beliefs aren't 100% in line with any one denomination that I am aware of. They are fairly close to several different denominations though. Here where I live, it is not a very churched place, but there are still dozens, if not hundreds, of churches available to choose from.

[Melinda in VT]

And my question is: Why? Is there a purpose served by allowing some variances between congregations that I'm not seeing as an outsider?

 

I think the answer to "why" is that many denominations have more power and control at the local level than at the top. There are several advantages to this: I think it is more difficult for a group to be lead astray than for a single person to be lead astray. It also more easily allows for cultural variations. I'd provide examples, but I worry they would come across as critical.

 

Do some denominations not have as many hard-and-fast standards for what can and cannot be preached from a pulpit that bears it's name?

 

I currently attend a United Church of Christ (UCC) church. It is, as a previous poster mentioned, a non-creedal denomination. We definitely have far, far fewer restrictions on what can be preached from the pulpit.

 

Is there a mechanism in place to address a Pastor or Preacher or Priest who might start preaching things that are out-of-line with the denominations interpretation of Scripture? I'm honestly curious. :)

 

Our denomination doesn't have an interpretation of Scripture that all have to adhere to. I suppose (but don't know) that the national group could refuse to allow a member congregation to join the national group. It's the congregation that chooses the pastor. I don't believe the national denomination has any control over that (but I've never been a member of a church that has been searching for a pastor).