The Problem with Loose Canons, Part I

This post is largely inspired by Adam's comment on yesterday's.

One of the salient features of North American Christianity is the diversity of its denominations. (I'll save the question of non-denominational congregations for later.) Citizens of the United States have always been notoriously nonconformist. If we don't like the way one group is doing something, we start our own and do whatever it is our own way. Unfortunately, the Church has adopted that same attitude.

I'm not against denominations. Not at all, in fact—they provide necessary parameters both for doctrine and practice, and can even facilitate reconciliation between groups. What I am against is the ease with which denominations are formed.

There are almost always better options than starting from scratch. Let's say you're the pastor of a church, and your denominational heads have become increasingly liberal; you could start your own version of the parent group, a "purer" or "more traditional" version....or you could investigate other denominations and lead your congregation into the one that offers the best fit. (With the plethora out there, a similar organization has to exist.)

Or you're a parishioner, and your church body is going off the deep end. You don't just go do your own thing, you find another church already doing something similar to what you believe. That's one of the central doctrines of ecclesiology, in fact; the Church is a body, and congregations cut off from the rest are likely to die, if not through disbandment, then through spiritual decay, the acceptance of false doctrine, or unaddressed sin problems. The same applies to individuals—separated from the larger assembly, growth and faithfulness become impossible.

I'm not suggesting a return to Catholicism. The current trend toward Medieval Christianity is a significant step backward, and the Papacy is a defunct doctrine on many levels, not least because no single human man is competent to shepherd the entire body of believers. But the idea of authority is important to the health of the Church universal as well as local assemblies, and the maverick attitude adopted by many church leaders these days is a significant break with the doctrines of Luther and Calvin.

Simply starting a new denomination because you don't like the old one is no way to resolve issues. I wonder sometimes how far away from orthodoxy some groups would have strayed if their faithful constituents had fought for truth and not left at the first sign of trouble. I understand and respect the reasons many have for leaving assemblies rather than working toward reform, but if everyone keeps leaving groups and forming new ones, the Church universal will eventually become anemic, and bleed out slowly from a thousand different wounds.

Except that Christ is in control, of course, and that will never happen. That assurance doesn't mean, however, that the Church can't go through periods of sickness and danger. It simply means that, given the very real external and internal threats which dog Christ's people, our aim should be increased rather than less unity. Sectarianism, division and splintering won't contribute to that end; the Church must learn to heal its wounds collectively rather than continually making new ones in the strange and empty hope that they will make it stronger and more pure.