As I read through a list of seminary students involved in
a preaching event, I noted that where their faith traditions were listed that a
number indicated that they were “non-denominational” or “interdenominational.” I don’t remember anyone putting “none.” I would love to hear their definitions of
these terms, but let’s just assume for a minute that by using either of these
terms the student is saying one of two things:
“I belong to a church that is not related to a particular denomination”
or “I am not committed to a particular faith tradition.”
This seems to be a growing trend for some students in theological
institutions. Many schools have diverse
student bodies and enroll students from a number of denominational backgrounds,
but some students indicate that they are not part of any particular denomination. My friend Dick Olsen at Central Seminary
comments that he often asks students in a particular course to read fifty pages
about their denomination or faith tradition.
Some either don’t have one to read about or can’t find that many pages
about their denomination!
Perhaps this is an analogy to the “I’m spiritual but not
religious” mantra. In both instances,
the people involved are not hostile to the spiritual life and may even want to
serve a congregation but they are concerned about being specific in their commitment. How does this happen?
Could it be because the student has had a bad experience
in a particular denomination or church no longer wishes to be identified with
it? Certainly that is possible and there
are enough problems in churches that many of us can understand that decision.
Maybe the individual became a person of faith through
contact with a parachurch group or a non-denominational church. There have been campus groups (such as Campus
Crusade—now “Cru,” Navigators, and Inter-Varsity Christian Fellowship) for
years that are not connected to any particular church and many of those who
came to Christ through the witness of those groups have started churches that
are not related to a particular denomination.
Of course, it is possible that the student is just
waiting for the right church or denomination to come along. They have not made a choice yet but they “will
know it when they see it.”
This raises questions for theological educators such as “What
is our role in helping a student to find a church home or affiliation?” and “If we are helping to equip this person
for ministry, shouldn’t we have some understanding of the church or people that
the student will serve?” Failure to
answer these questions properly can lead to frustration for both the faculty
and the student.
A new era brings new challenges, doesn’t it?
Comments
I believe that the non-denominational crowd has mostly rejected denominations as they have become overly focused on their particular tradition or way of church. Being free from these structures is a double-edged sword. They do not have the wealth of history and tradition to draw upon in times of crisis, but they are freer to explore new ways of being Christian.
I believe that the interdenominational crowd recognizes that the arguments and divisions of the past are not as important today. Honestly, is the debate over infant baptism really as important as poverty issues? Are drawn out dialogues concerning predestination really a priority over addressing gun violence in our country? I believe that this group sees more value in making partnerships across traditional lines that holding to a particular tradition.
Ultimately, I am Baptist for better or for worse. But, I am not so monolithically defined by it that I cannot work or serve in other denominations. My priority is to find a place to serve God not to carry on one particular tradition. Further, John 17 gives a pretty solid biblical foundation for seeking to be interdenominational or as some older people call it ecumenical.