Religious denominations lack Biblical authority. Jesus died for the church, which is His body (Acts 20:30; Eph. 1:22-23). Denominations were begun by men over a thousand years after the church was established on the day of Pentecost, and from the sixteenth century onward they have proliferated.
They do not represent Christ; they are not authorized by the Bible, and they vote on moral issues in their national conventions (as though God had given them such a right). Many have shown a willingness to ignore what the Bible says on the subject of homosexuality and allowing women to preach (not to mention disregarding its teachings on marriage, modesty, gambling, and other moral issues).
But sometimes they can be funny, as typified by an agreement on the part of some this week to fellowship one another. The story was reported in The Dallas Morning News on August 19th.
In approving a document called the Formula of Agreement, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America decided to bridge gaps within Protestantism….
Although not a merger, the document calls for “full communion” between the 5.2 million-member Lutheran denomination and three other churches, the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), the United Church of Christ and the Reformed Church in America, which together account for about 5 million members (3A).
Of course, the most logical question is: “Is the Lutheran Church in America in fellowship with other Lutheran churches (Missouri Synod, for example)?” And if they are, why are there different branches? There are obviously some issues that divide Lutherans.
But the article gets even more interesting when it explains how the “full communion” will work.
Its practical effect means that the churches retain their creeds and theological traditions but fully recognize each other’s sacraments and clergy members and can collaborate in missionary work and major social service projects.
Excuse an obvious observation, but what is it that keeps people apart if not their creeds and theological traditions? Is this statement not a confession that creeds are not worth dividing over and that the issues that divided them for hundreds of years did not really matter? What can this mean, except that doctrine is irrelevant? If such is the case, then they ought to throw away the books on “systematic theology” that they make all their “seminary” students study.
Does it not further mean that when these men “preach” or exchange pulpits, they will not be spending any time on doctrine–the doctrine that makes them Lutheran or Presbyterian? [The United Church of Christ (no relation to us) gave up teaching anything distinctive (not to mention Biblical) a long time ago.] This agreement fairly screams, “Doctrine doesn’t matter!”
But if these religious groups are going to be united, then why retain their creeds, theological traditions, and names? They are on the one hand acknowledging that these things have divided them in the past but then insisting that they can fellowship each other despite these differences which they still wish to retain. In other words, they are “agreeing to disagree” for “political” purposes. This loose federation will be stronger in numbers and richer with their combined wealth (but no closer to the Scriptural organization taught in the Bible).
But the article portrays a glitch amidst these union hopefuls. The “vote on the Lutheran-Episcopal document, called the Concordat of Agreement, fell six votes short of the necessary majority” (3A). The chief ecumenical officer for the United Church of Christ commented on this tragedy.
“We find ourselves in a very awkward position of trying to combine a sense of gratitude and grief, a sense of joy and sorrow, and also an awareness that many of our closest colleagues are feeling a deep sense of pain at the moment.”
The principal Episcopal author of the agreement also lamented the failure to be included in this pact: “I think the ELCA [Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, GWS] has missed the most significant ecumenical opportunity of the 20th century.”
Wrong. The most significant ecumenical plan would involve doing something these men would never think of–returning to the simplicity of the pattern given in the New Testament. Where does the Bible talk about denominational structures? Where does it mention those claiming to be Christians being called by some denominational name? Where does it advise saints to have national assemblies and to vote on Biblical issues? Where does it authorize “clergy”?
Why were the Episcopalians excluded?
Others said the agreement failed because of persisting fears among some Lutherans of binding themselves to a church in which bishops play so large a role. Lutherans elect their bishops for six-year terms as opposed to giving them lifetime tenure as do Catholics and Episcopalians.
Notice that the division exists NOT over a Bible teaching, but rather over how both groups have misapplied Scriptures! Neither group has bishops as defined by 1 Timothy 3 or Titus 1. Neither do they have a plurality of bishops over one congregation. Contrary to the New Testament, their bishops exercise authority over a number of local congregations. Neither group objects to such an unscriptural arrangement–only as to how long the term of office should be: six years or life.
This news item demonstrates what we have said all along about man-made religious denominations. Their very existence shows a disrespect for the Holy Scriptures, for God did not authorize them nor the hierarchies that exist within them. They are divisive–and frequently over what the Scriptures do not teach or authorize. What an irony that they take a stand on a non-Biblical issue but can brush aside clear New Testament teaching for the sake of unity!
As Jesus said, “Every plant which My heavenly Father has not planted will be uprooted. Let them alone. They are blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind leads the blind, both will fall into the ditch” (Matt. 15:13-14).
*Send comments or questions concerning this article to Gary Summers. Please refer to this article as: “UNITY AMONG SOME DENOMINATIONS (8/30/97).”