What Makes A Church A Denomination?
(Part 1 of a series)
Quote: There
is no doubt that there is a denominational attachment with the phrase,
"church of Christ" or "churches of Christ" among many.-Unquote!
TB: I’m thinking about the Lord’s church found in the Bible
and want to use an expression that captures what it is. It is “the church”. It is “the assembly”, but it is not just any
assembly. It is a very unique assembly of people and they are related to Jesus
Christ. “Church of Christ” is certainly
good and biblical. Do some have “a denominational attachment with those phrases”? I don’t have a “denominational attachment” to
the phrase “churches of Christ”, but I really like that phrase as a very
adequate and scriptural way of describing the Lord’s church. I don’t see a need to drop the phrase just
because someone will accuse me of having a “denominational attachment” to that
phrase. I could just as easily accuse
those who are choosing to drop the “church of Christ” phrase and just calling
it “the assembly” as having a “denominational attachment” with that
phrase. Does that make it so?
Quote: …the use of the phrase and the attachment to
it as a denominational marker. –Unquote!
TB: Is the use of the phrase “church of Christ” a “denominational
marker”? I don’t think so. But, let’s
test this. If Paul described a bunch of
churches “churches of Christ”(Rom.16:16), is that a denominational marker? I really don’t think so, but let us suppose a
group of churches decided it was a “denominational marker” to refer to the Lord’s
church by the regular designation of “church of Christ”. Instead, they decided
to put “the assembly” or “the church” on the sign outside. Has that now become a “denominational marker”? It could just as easily become a new “denominational
marker” as the “church of Christ” description phrase. If not, why not?
Providing the description is biblical, the sign will never
keep people from thinking of a “denominational marker” no matter what you put
on the sign. Paul was not able to escape
the charge of “sect-arianism” with or without a sign. The sign is not a “denominational indicator”. Let us be honest. People reject churches of Christ because of
the TRUTH generally taught from those groups, or because they were turned off
by an experience with a “Christian”.
Some “Christians” have not represented Jesus very well. To keep people from being prejudiced against “Christians”,
should we drop the name “Christian”? People
were prejudiced against “Christians” in the first century and later. Would it have then been expedient to quit
referring to themselves as “Christians” so that the prejudice could die down? Absolutely
not! What we will do is try to encourage
Christians to try to represent Jesus better and quit giving the name “Christian”
a bad name by bad behavior.
Likewise, if you change the sign outside from “church of
Christ” to “the assembly”, what have you accomplished? If the members have not changed their
personal behavior, how will the new sign avoid the “denominational marker”? How will the sign keep the “Christians” from
bad behavior? It won’t. Teaching the truth about what you mean by ANY
description on the sign (if you opt for a sign at all) is the only way to
educate people about the Lord’s church.
The fact that three churches decided to drop a reference on their sign
in favor of another description means they have now adopted a NEW “denominational
indicator” if the old sign was a “denominational indicator”. If the discarded description was truly a “denominational
indicator”, then so is the new sign. I really don’t care what you put on the
sign, the sign is not by itself a “denominational indicator”. So, I think the phrase “church of Christ” is
a very good description, don’t agree that the group inside is a “denomination”,
or that the words on the sign outside is
a “denominational indicator”. It really depends on other things, not the words
on the sign.
Let’s suppose that a group decides to put “Christians meet
here” on the sign. Another church thinks that is a good idea and so they do the
same. Has this sign now become a “denominational indicator” of what this group
is? This is the denomination that likes
to put “Christians meet here” on their sign.
If we are honest we know that “church of Christ” on a sign is not a “denominational
indicator” any more than “the assembly” is a denominational indicator or “Christians
meet here” is a denominational indicator.
It depends on other things. I
want people to know us for what we do and teach, not for what they think they
can assess from the sign out front. Remember,
with no building and no sign the apostles were still thought to be in a “sect”.
They were not. But, the lack of a sign did not keep people from thinking that
he was in a new “sect” instead of the undenominated , non-sectarian body of
saved people belonging to God. So,
changing the description on the sign is not the answer. Taking down the sign is
not the answer. Using a description on a
sign that describes what you are, a group that belongs to Christ, may help
brethren think of commonality, but it does nothing toward keeping
denominationally-minded people from pigeon-holing you as a denomination or
sect. Overcoming that idea is only
accomplished by teaching. Let us not be ashamed of a good description, nor shy
away from telling the whole TRUTH and nothing but the truth. The truth will set
men free from denominationalism and every other sin. –Terry W. Benton
