The Non-denominational Heresy - Some (Personal) Musings

My attention was drawn recently to an advertisement for a Non-denominational Church. At first, I did not think this odd; after all, we Anglicans are `denominational', aren't we? However, the more I thought, the odder, and the more heretical, the idea of a `non-denominational' church seemed to be. (Heresy = "holding an opinion contrary to the orthodox doctrine of the Christian Church") `Denomination' means "a name or designation" (The Concise Oxford Dictionary) or more simply a `label'. We may all say that we dislike being labeled, but labels are very useful things. Common sense tells us to beware of things that do not have an adequate label: `never buy a pig in a poke!'. `Anglican' is also a label, and a very important one, as it tells us a lot about our individual church.

The label `Anglican' tells us that we belong to an international church, because we are part of a world-wide communion of churches. It tells us that we are a church with a pedigree. The church of St Patrick, St Gall and St Hilda, of Bede and St Boniface, of Thomas Becket, John Wycliffe, Lady Julian of Norwich and Thomas Cranmer, of Queen Elizabeth I and Richard Hooker, of the Wesley brothers, William Wilberforce, John Henry Newman (even if he left it), of Dorothy L Sayers, C S Lewis, and of many, many more. Moreover, it tells us we are, or ought to be, a church that welcomes a wide range of Christians and of styles of Christianity (see the above list).

It tells us that we are a Bible-based Church. "Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation: so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be believed as an article of the Faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation." (Article 6 of `The (39) Articles of Religion') However, I hope that rather than being a Bible-centred church, we are a Christ-centred church (e.g. I Corinthians 2.2). The Word of God in Scripture is not `the Word made flesh': Jesus is. The Scriptures are given to encourage us (Romans 15.4), and are useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness (2 Timothy 3.16), but Christ is the fullness of Godhead and Christ is all (Colossians 2.9, 3.11).

It tells us we are part of the Catholic (= one universal) Church: "The Three Creeds, Nicene Creed, Athanasius's Creed, and that which is commonly called the Apostles' Creed, ought thoroughly to be received and believed: for they may be proved by most certain warrents of holy Scripture." (Article 9, op. cit.) We belong to a church which acknowledges that the division of the `Body of Christ' into separate denominations is wrong. That is why we pray: "Heavenly Father, you have called us in the Body of your Son Jesus Christ to continue his work of reconciliation and reveal you to mankind. Forgive us the sins which tear us apart; give us the courage to overcome our fears and to seek that unity which is your gift and your will; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen. (Collect `For the Unity of the Church', The Alternative Service Book 1980, page 904). And that is why, mindful of Christ's prayer that the Church should be one (John 17.11), the Anglican Church has sought ways (sometimes imperfect ways) of repenting of, and overcoming, the disunity between the churches, seeking to re-unite the Church according to Christ's will [e.g. ARCIC, Conciliar Process, Meissen Agreement, Porvoo Agreement, World Council of Churches].

`Non-denominational' is also a label, albeit a self-contradictory label: literally a `non-label'! It tells us nothing of the beliefs of the church concerned, except that they have chosen to separate from all the other churches with a label. We are left to guess what might have caused them to take the drastic step of adding yet another new church to the thousands that already exist. We could be forgiven if we wonder if they are among those mentioned in 2 Timothy (4.3,5): "the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. . . But you, keep your head in all situations, endure hardship, do the work of an evangelist, discharge all the duties of your ministry."

So, what doctrine is `sound'? Firstly, the essentials have been taught by `the Church' from the beginning. "For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance . . . Whether, then, it was I [Paul] or they [the Jerusalem Church] this is what we preach". (1 Corinthians 15.3,11) "Hold firmly to the trustworthy message as it has been taught, so that you can encourage others by sound doctrine and refute those who oppose it." (Titus 1.9) Secondly, sound doctrine builds up the church, the one `body of Christ'. "I urge you to live a life worthy of the calling you have received. Be completely humble and gentle; be patient, bearing with one another in love. Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit - just as you were called to one hope when you were called - one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all." (Ephesians 4.3-6). A divided `body of Christ' is a nonsense (Jesus tells us a house divided against itself will fall. Luke 11.17) and is against Jesus' express wish that his people should be one as he and the Father are one. (John 17.11)

The `true' Church will always have faults because it is made up of sinners (Luke 5.32; 1 John 1.8), and, because it is made up of sinners, there will always be divisions in the Church. Anglican churches have as many, if not more, faults than others. However, divisions should not cause us to separate, but to strive for the truth (e.g. 1 Corinthians 11.18-19, & Titus 3.9-11?). But, we should not only "strive" for the truth, but also "make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit" (Ephesians 4 again). We are given no mandate to separate just because we disagree.

It is, of course, perfectly proper, to have a non-denominational body that is not a church. A mission society, a Bible society, a publisher, could all be denominational or non-denominational; though cross-denominational would be a better description, unless the society concerned holds no beliefs at all! A non-denominational church is a logical impossibility, unless `church' is gutted of all meaning and simply means `any gathering'. That a group may be forced out of a particular church, perhaps through no fault of their own, and choose, or are forced, to start a new denomination, is part of the history of the Church throughout the ages. The Methodists and the Pentecostals spring to mind as regrettable examples of those forced out, from the Church of England, and from the Methodist Church among others, respectively. However, they and others were honest enough to admit they were starting a new Church (denomination), and humble enough (in most cases) not to deny that the Church from which they came was still a church too.

The only other understanding of `non-denominational' is that the label is being used in some way to deceive, implying that the `church' concerned is part of the one true church, while at the same time distancing itself from it. I am reminded of "Christian Science" of which it is well said, "it is neither `Christian' nor `Science'", or of a label attached to a building in my previous parish: "Golden Light Christian Spiritualist Church". Neither of these groups holds `the orthodox doctrine of the Christian Church' (and both are therefore heretical). In fact, we talk of "Christian Science" as a `sect' rather than as a `denomination' precisely because they have decided that they alone have the truth and we do not and that consequently they have separated from us. If any church labels itself as `not the same as' the `other churches', it would seem to be placing itself among the sects (and therefore also the heretics) and not within the `body of Christ'. I refer, of course, only to the term `non-denominational', not to the intentions of the members of any church with that label, but what I do not understand is why any Christian church should choose to use that label.

However, let us give `sound doctrine' the last word: "I urge you to live a life worthy of the calling you have received. Be completely humble and gentle; be patient, bearing with one another in love. Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit - just as you were called to one hope when you were called - one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all." (Ephesians 4:3-6).

Richard Pamplin Sept. 2001