Which denomination....

I would like to get some thoughts and opinions on something, but first some background on me: I have been looking for a church home for quite some time. I grew up Southern Baptist, but by choice and because of some things that happened to me personally, I left that faith by age 20. I briefly became an agnostic but then began to seriously investigate the claims of all the world's religions. I gradually made my way back to Christianity by way of Quakerism and considered myself a Quaker for years, although there was no Quaker church or meeting anywhere close to me. Then, at about age 30, something else happened that made me see that trying to live as an isolated Christian was folly. I then started visiting various churches. I had a very bad experience in a Charismatic church, and I knew that wasn't right for me. Over the next few years, I joined a Baptist church, a United Methodist church, and the Episcopal Church. I never felt at home in any of them. The SBC by that time had become too fundamentalist for me, although I agreed with them on ethical and moral issues, and the UMC and TEC were too liberal on those issues. Also, I have always had a wide variety of doctrinal views, so much so that I don't seem to fit in anywhere -- in any denomination, that is. I thought I would post a list of my views , and see what people here think about which denomination they would best fit into. I did this some years ago on a fundamentalist Baptist forum and got blasted -- not from everybody but from a lot of members there. Anyway, my choices for churches in my area are rather limited, as I live in a rural part of the southern USA. The denominations around here are: Various Pentecostal and Charismatic churches, the UMC, PCUSA, Southern Baptist and independent Baptist, Nazarene, TEC, SDA, RCC. There is a LCMS church about an hour away, also an AMiA (Anglican Mission) about the same distance, and a Free Will Baptist church about an hour in the opposite direction. So, those are my choices. I feel drawn to the Mennonites, but nearest church is over two hours. I would say the denominations I feel most compatible with are moderate Mennonites, Quakers, Anglicans, and Baptists. Seems like there are no moderates anymore but either far right or far left churches and individuals. Also, my views contain some evangelical and "catholic" elements. Here is my list; I wonder if there is any denomination that these fit into, or would even come close to. I seriously want a church home but feel like an outcast, like I really don't belong anywhere, as my views are too varied:


(1) Christus Victor/Recapitulation/Ransom atonement
(2) Infant dedication allowed
(3) Believer's baptism
(4) No "once saved, always saved"
(5) Prefer baptism by immersion, with exceptions
(illness, disability)
(6) No baptismal regeneration
(7) Liberty of conscience
(8) Church-state separation
(9) Religious liberty
(10) Priesthood of the believer
(11) Freedom of Bible interpretation
(12) Voluntary giving -- no denominational assessments
(13) Church owns its property
(14) Absolute equality of members, including
gender equality--any member, male or
female , may serve the church in any
capacity
(14) Prayers for the dead
(15) Candles in worship service
(16) Vestments acceptable (simplicity desired)
(17) Liturgy desirable/acceptable
(18) Open communion--any believer may
partake; water baptism not a
prerequisite
(19) Occasional readings from the Apocrypha
acceptable
(20) No clergy titles such as "Reverend"
(21) Bible, the final external authority, but
use God-given reason and experience in
interpretation of scripture
(22) The Light of Christ in every human being
(23) Jesus Christ, the criterion by which
scripture is interpreted under the
guidance of the Holy Spirit
(24) Lay-administered sacraments allowed

muddleglum said:

I wouldn't worry about doctrinal views, if I were you. The real question is what God is leading you to. I've been in varied groups and some, I think, didn't care for me to be there. Some, who you would have thought should have stoned me, elevated me instead. What I usually did was to focus on what Christ's Spirit was teaching me at the time and edifying my brethren gently. I'm still trying to learn to do that last well. So, I'll say that a laundry list of different doctrines is of little use to the Lord. Instead, seek for the church hidden within the institution you visit (make sense?) and investigate how to build it up.

Interestingly enough, I found that what is conceptually followed is more important than what is verbally taught. The logos of mature Christians in any institution compares favorably with the logos of mature Christians in other institutions. Its funny to hear them say opposite things but mean the same in practice.

Here's something to remember. Most people think of a line when comparing doctrine. One person is on one end, and another person on the other. In reality it is more like a triangle with God at the apex. If both Christians are striving to come closer to the Lord, then they can't help but tend to be closer to each other in thought in deed, if not in verbal agreement, as they grow closer to God.

I wish my current group had some church traditions that are like 'x' group back in my past, but I'm learning much about the brotherhood of believers in this group. Isn't that something to praise God about?

Click to expand...

Thanks very much for your reply!

Some might find this thread interesting. It's an older thread that I found and posted in last night:

http://www.christianforums.com/thre...osest-to-the-early-christians.7684878/page-13

Caretaker said:

Seems to me the Church of the Brethren would be a pretty close match with most of the above.

Go here to find a church location: http://www.brethren.org/church

But do be aware that there are very large differences between individual Church of the Brethren churches. A few still advocate plain dress along the lines of the Amish and conservative Mennonite. But most no longer do. If one Church of the Brethren church doesn't suit you, try another because of the differences between churches.

Click to expand...

Thank you for your helpful reply. Yes, I do have an affinity for the Church of the Brethren. But, like the Mennonites, the nearest Brethren church to me is 2.5 hours away.

Caretaker said:

The Church of the Brethren has a "Church Planting" effort. See here for more info: http://www.brethren.org/churchplanting/

Typically one or more nearby churches assist with starting a new congregation. This might be an opportunity for you.

Click to expand...

Thank you very much!

Let me ask a few questions about Church of the Brethren polity and doctrine: Does the CotB allow homosexual marriages and ordinations? Is the local church autonomous -- that is, does the local church own its property, or does the denomination own it? If a local church wanted to leave the denomination, could it keep its property? Does the local church decide how much money to give to the denomination, or is the local church assessed or apportioned an amount by the denomination, like the Methodists and Nazarenes do?

A lot of questions, I know. I hope you can answer them and won't mind doing so.

Caretaker said:

The local church is largely autonomous, but not completely. The fact that the local church is largely autonomous is why there are such wide variations between Church of the Brethren congregations regarding practices such as dress, military participation, etc.

The 1983 Annual Conference Statement, "Human Sexuality From a Christian Perspective" was recently reaffirmed by Annual Conference, and is considered governing with regard to human sexuality issues. It can be found here: http://www.brethren.org/ac/statements/1983humansexuality.html

The local church owns its own property, but should the local church leave the congregation the property reverts to ownership by the local Church of the Brethren district. My understanding of the intention of this rule is to protect local churches from "assault" by an outside group whereby members of the outside group would join the church surreptitiously with the elicit purpose of gaining a voting majority within the church and thereby taking over the property.

There is an "assessment" on the local congregation (based on the number of local members that is sometimes also adjusted for other reasons) with regard to how much each local congregation should give to the local district as well as to the national denomination, but the "assessment" is non-binding. It is intended as a guideline.

Click to expand...

So, if the suggested assessment is not given, there is no negative consequence or 'punishment' to the local church?

I read the statement on sexuality; it appears to not affirm homosexual behavior. Do you know to what degree this position is accepted in the denomination at large?

With regard to property, I can understand the policy you talked about. But what if, for instance, the denomination changed it's position on homosexuality and starting affirming homosexual marriage or behavior. If a local church decided to withdraw from the denomination over that issue, it would lose its property, is that correct?

Thank you very much for all your helpful answers.

Caretaker said:

The Church of the Brethren strives toward unity. The reasons for a local church not wanting to give the suggested amount to the local district and/or the denomination are paramount. Perhaps there is an immediate local need for the funds, i.e., a building project. Perhaps local industry moved out of the area and giving is way down. Perhaps there are differences with regard to how money is being spent at the district and/or denomination level that need to be worked out. Certainly a local church consistently failing to meet suggested donation levels will attract the attention of the district, the denomination, and even of other local congregations. But to the best of my knowledge there is neither an attempt to enforce any level of giving from local congregations to the local district or to the denomination, nor is there any mechanism to do so outside of the power of persuasion and the spirit of unity.

There is a relatively strong LGBT component within the Church of the Brethren that disagrees with the 1983 statement on human sexuality (as there are LGBT components within other Anabaptist denominations like the Mennonites). The prevailing direction of the denomination is to seek unity in the light of the scriptures and the guidance of the Holy Spirit. In short, the Church of the Brethren continues to struggle with these issues as do many other denominations. You will find marked differences with regard to the degree of agreement with the 1983 paper from one local COB church to another, just as there are marked differences among local COB churches on other issues.

As it stands now, yes, any local church withdrawing from the congregation would lose the church property as it would revert to the local district. This is a requirement that must be written into the church constitution and by-laws before a church is allowed to join the denomination. However, if there were to be a major split within the denomination where many churches desired to withdraw, it is conceivable (at least to me) that the governing body (Annual Conference) might permit the withdrawing churches to retain ownership of their local churches at least in some cases, such as maybe where the vote to split off was 100% of the local congregation or very nearly 100% of the local congregation.

Click to expand...

Is there a prevailing CotB doctrine of the atonement?

Caretaker said:

The Church of the Brethren has historically and to this day maintained no formal creed but instead holds the New Testament as its only creed and its guide to faith and practice.

I can refer you to the book, Cooperative Salvation: A Brethren View of Atonement by Kate Eisenbise Crell with the cautionary note that I have not read it and the reminder that views on many subjects vary widely within the Church of the Brethren.

Click to expand...

I've actually read that book, but thanks for the reference.

Caretaker said:

The Church of the Brethren strives toward unity. The reasons for a local church not wanting to give the suggested amount to the local district and/or the denomination are paramount. Perhaps there is an immediate local need for the funds, i.e., a building project. Perhaps local industry moved out of the area and giving is way down. Perhaps there are differences with regard to how money is being spent at the district and/or denomination level that need to be worked out. Certainly a local church consistently failing to meet suggested donation levels will attract the attention of the district, the denomination, and even of other local congregations. But to the best of my knowledge there is neither an attempt to enforce any level of giving from local congregations to the local district or to the denomination, nor is there any mechanism to do so outside of the power of persuasion and the spirit of unity.

There is a relatively strong LGBT component within the Church of the Brethren that disagrees with the 1983 statement on human sexuality (as there are LGBT components within other Anabaptist denominations like the Mennonites). The prevailing direction of the denomination is to seek unity in the light of the scriptures and the guidance of the Holy Spirit. In short, the Church of the Brethren continues to struggle with these issues as do many other denominations. You will find marked differences with regard to the degree of agreement with the 1983 paper from one local COB church to another, just as there are marked differences among local COB churches on other issues.

As it stands now, yes, any local church withdrawing from the congregation would lose the church property as it would revert to the local district. This is a requirement that must be written into the church constitution and by-laws before a church is allowed to join the denomination. However, if there were to be a major split within the denomination where many churches desired to withdraw, it is conceivable (at least to me) that the governing body (Annual Conference) might permit the withdrawing churches to retain ownership of their local churches at least in some cases, such as maybe where the vote to split off was 100% of the local congregation or very nearly 100% of the local congregation.

Click to expand...

How much of a majority of the denomination still holds to its official position on homosexuality? Is the percentage stable, or is it steadily declining over the years, like in the Mennonite Church USA?

Caretaker said:

Some type of series of in depth studies or polls would be required to answer that question, and I know of no such series of studies or polls.

Click to expand...

Thank you for your reply.

I have been again studying the structure of the CotB. I would prefer a more congregational polity, with local church ownership of its property, etc. I believe the Mennonites would be a better fit for me. Of course it may be a moot question because there are no Anabaptist churches of any kind near me.

You surely have been helpful, and I greatly appreciate that.

Caretaker said:

While there is some Mennonite in my heritage, and while I have Mennonite relatives through marriage, and while I have worked and associated with Mennonites (and Amish) my entire life, I do not consider myself an authority on Mennonite practices. Never-the-less, my current understanding is that most if not all Mennonite churches have the same policies regarding church ownership as the Church of the Brethren has, and for the same reasons. Those who envision/desire a split from their parent denomination or "conference" (the term used by Mennonites for their branch of the Mennonite church) are upset by that, while the parent conference and those that adhere to its practices are not.

To the best of my knowledge there are very few denominations more "congregational" in governance than Brethren, Mennonite, and Amish, and of the three, again by my understanding, the Church of the Brethren is the most congregational in governance. This may be because the Church of the Brethren was born out of the Pietist movement which has several divisions between it and the very hierarchical Catholic church, while the Mennonites were a direct split from the Catholic church. I find that among the Mennonites and the Amish the ministers/elders/bishops wield significant power over people's lives - much more so than in the Church of the Brethren. So, in that sense, the Church of the Brethren is much more congregational in governance and less hierarchical than the Mennonites or Amish.

While I have read of a few minor denominations that are more congregational in governance than the Church of the Brethren I cannot bring their name(s) to mind at the moment. Generally speaking, though, most that are more congregational than the Church of the Brethren are independent churches.

Perhaps that is the route you should go: independent.

Click to expand...

From the CotB website, they state that their polity is a combination of congregational and presbyterial.

As an example of congregational polity in which churches are more-so than the Brethren, Baptists and Churches of Christ come to mind. Local churches in these denominations own their own property. Even in the Anglican Mission in the Americas (AMiA), an Anglican body which split from the Episcopal Church, it is written into their constitution that each local church has an indefeasible right to own its own property. Traditional Anglicans learned the hard way about the importance of local church ownership of its property when the Episcopal Church departed from orthodoxy and the traditionalists wished to leave.

In the Gulf States Conference of the Mennonite Church USA, many of their churches during this year have withdrawn over the homosexuality issue. None of them had to give up their property. Those are the Mennonite churches closest to me, about a 2.5 hour drive.

I have thought an independent church might be an option. However, I have yet to find a truly independent church. Around here, they are Charismatic/Pentecostal.