I wonder how many splits and new denominations were over theological issues and how many were renewal movements that gave up on the tradition they were trying to renew…

One of the things that the professor of the class mentioned is that by and large, the Catholic Church has been successful at absorbing and/or crushing renewal movements. Much of the Catholic renewal movements were through the monastic movements, which gave them far more autonomy than the local church. (And the monastic movement was the primary way that the church did Mission up until the Protestant Reformation) Over time, some of the monastic houses turned corrupt or lost it’s “radicalness” allowing the Church to easily absorb it, and others were just banished as heretical, which basically choked them from having any life to continue.

What this challenges for me is holding the tension of allowing God to do the new thing (as a leader, this requires humility), and the wisdom to stress the essentials of the faith.

First question, you still consider yourself a Presbyterian? Aren’t you a member of another denomination nowadays? Or do you see yourself going back to that denomination some day — once they renew themselves, perhaps? Just curious.

What is interesting about the history of the Church is that aside from the big schism with Protestants, the Roman Catholic Church has been able to, by and large, absorb most renewal movements. (The schism in 1054 with the Eastern Orthodox Church was not over a renewal issue.) I think one could argue that the majority of the monastic orders and even Vatican II were renewal movements. But these movements always maintained the primacy of the Pope, unlike the Reformers. Having an agreed-upon hierarchy helps maintain unity. The fact that many of the Base Churches inspired by Latin American liberation theology are receiving a hard time from Rome may be due to the fact that they question the hierarchy, though there are other important theological issues at hand as well.

That the Protestant churches don’t have a divinely appointed head makes splitting much easier. There isn’t a single thing that we all agree upon that keeps us together as sociological bodies. I say this as one rooted in a congregational tradition, so I appreciate a non-hierarchical polity. I think that you’re right about people leaving traditions rather than sticking it out with them. The fact that we have so many denominations in the US alone is a negative consequence of the Reformation, in my opinion. I occasionally wrestle with this issue since I have left the tradition of my youth. The denomination of which I am a member has two sister denominations, and we all split off from the Swedish Lutheran (ie, state) Church. We were all a part of the same renewal movement among the Swedish Lutherans, but then we wanted to emphasize different issues. Some wanted a specific view of baptism, others a specific view of eschatology, while my denomination chose to emphasize freedom in Christ and mission.

Your last paragraph is the most haunting to me. So many renewal movements start in good places, but eventually develop a tinge of, “We know how to be real Christians.” Such an attitude is always dangerous and harmful, in my opinion.