A recent episode of Iron Sharpens Iron caught my eye as it
called attention to some of the conservative remnants and their resistance to
theological liberalism within the United Church of Christ (UCC).
This denomination is sometimes confused with the Churches of
Christ which is a nineteenth century Restorationist group that emerged in the
context of the Second Great Awakening. They have nothing in common and no
connection. The UCC was formed in 1957 and it basically assimilated the
remaining Congregationalist Churches which dated back in some instances to
colonial New England. Some extant Evangelicals rejected the formation of this
theologically liberal denomination and retained their independent polity, while
others joined up with groups like the 4-C's – the Conservative Congregational
Christian Conference. A few of these (like some UCC congregations) still retain
the 'Reformed' appellation.
In the Northeast United States, UCC congregations are usually
old Congregationalist assemblies established by direct Puritan descendants or Yankee
settlers from New England. Others are German Reformed, something which is quite
common in Pennsylvania and parts of New York. And when you get near places like
Pittsburgh, Cleveland, and Chicago some UCC's are former Hungarian Reformed
congregations – something the interview failed to mention.
The UCC is one of the most theologically liberal
denominations in the United States. These groups were hit hard by the Higher
Criticism, rationalism, and the anti-supernaturalism that emerged and ran
rampant throughout the latter part of the nineteenth century. By the time the
UCC was formed in 1957, these groups were all in bad shape and had long
abandoned the authority of Scripture.
That said, there were and are still congregations to be found
that resist this tide. Basically there are older people that have often been in
the church for decades and yet have not fully grasped where the denomination
has gone. They've experienced years upon years of ministers who didn't really
believe or teach the Scriptures and yet went through the motions and used the
language of the liturgy and the like. And for those who weren't paying a lot of
attention or bothering to dig deep, they could end up sitting there for years
under such tepid and quietly subversive teaching. And while maybe getting
irritated at times, they never really grasped the profundity of the unbelief,
let alone the anti-New Testament values and doctrines being embraced on a
denominational level.
Some left years ago over the ordination of women, while others
tolerated it as it was in keeping with cultural trends. But as the culture wars
have intensified there have been groups of people within the UCC (and other
mainstream denominations) that have come to understand just how unbelieving and
worldly (even apostate) their denomination has become. What theological
conservatives understood decades ago, they are only now beginning to grasp.
This has led to congregations calling conservative ministers
unaffiliated with the UCC and in other cases they end up leaving the UCC
altogether. I know of people who have attended such churches in places like
Chicago-land, and I have encountered and attended some myself in Pennsylvania.
In fact I am very familiar with a former UCC congregation led by a Reformed
pastor – the now independent congregation finally broke with the UCC maybe a
decade ago. Some people are there because they are broadly Reformed and yet not
necessarily fully on board with Confessional groups like the OPC or PCA. Others
are there because they grew up in the congregation and while they rode the
waves of theological liberalism, they are now riding the conservative wave
taking them in another direction. In many cases these people have gone decades
without hearing a decent sermon and while uncertain as to where they stand, are
nevertheless invigorated by the hearing of the Word preached.
So having some familiarity with the topic and as the
interview focused on parts of Pennsylvania and a culture I'm familiar with – I
decided to listen.
I appreciated how on the one hand a distinction was made (and
rightly viewed as problematic) between those who are in theologically liberal
churches which have no real gospel and yet are caught up in Right-wing
politics. I have seen this firsthand not just in the context of the UCC but
even among the United Methodists in my area. The one guest rightly pointed out
that though these people are seemingly conservative, they're still lost. I
understand what he meant and agree with him, but 'conservative' also has
different meanings and in some contexts they are not necessarily positive, that
is they do not necessarily represent New Testament doctrines and values – which
seemed to be an assumption made by the guests.
I found myself repeatedly frustrated with Chris Arnzen's
inability to differentiate between politically Left-wing ideologies and that of
theological liberalism. The aforementioned example demonstrates they don't
always go together. Someone can be theologically liberal – having a less than
robust understanding of Biblical authority and the supernaturalism at the heart
of the Christian message even while being rapaciously Right-wing in their
thinking about nationalism, economics, and politics in general. To simply refer
to these UCC churches as 'Leftist' as Arnzen repeatedly does is misleading and
demonstrates a misunderstanding of the foundational issues at stake – or at
least some confusion as to what is motivating them. They are theologically
liberal but they're not all Leftist – a term Arnzen has repeatedly demonstrated
he's not very clear on himself.
Leftist politics in the Church – especially of the modern
variety and its emphasis on Identity Politics and the like is certainly
troublesome and needs to be confronted and condemned, although I would contend
that often the root problems and motivators in such cases (especially in the
realm of sexuality) are not genuinely leftist but represent Classical
Liberalism's individualist rights regime in a state of decadence and decay.
That said, Rightist politics are also just as problematic – a
statement Arnzen is probably incapable of understanding and would certainly
reject. Christians should not embrace worldly categories of thought, let alone
the false dichotomy or binary of contemporary American politics. The
assumptions of Classical Liberalism and the regime of 'rights' need to be challenged.
Incidentally this is the same font that leads to not just 'leftist' identity
politics but it also generates Right-wing forms of libertarianism. They're both
the offspring of the Enlightenment.
The same is true with regard to economics. The Scriptures
teach a view of money that is completely at odds with the world and its
economic models. As such we can condemn socialism (which doesn't actually exist
in the American context) as well as capitalism with its profit and usury-driven
motivations and exploitative ethics – which are in fact anti-ethics when viewed
from a Christian perspective. Both economic systems are problematic and neither
is Christian.
And nationalism is nothing less than idolatry. We are
appalled by the feminism and sodomy that prevail in theologically liberal
congregations but we are likewise offended and recoil when we witness the
nationalism, warmongering, sanctioned covetousness, and pride on full idolatrous
display in many 'theologically conservative' congregations. And this doesn't
even touch on the embrace of mythological (in reality heretical) narratives
about America and its supposed exceptionalism, the prevailing gun culture, as
well as the political factionalism and the rationalisation of evil alliances
and consequentialist ethics. There is much to find appalling in the garden
variety 'conservative' Evangelical church.
Arnzen provides little in the way of discernment and while I
was in some respects encouraged by the guests – one still in the UCC and the
other having led his congregation out of it, I was disappointed to visit their web
pages and discover that one, they're not all that conservative and two, it
seems clear enough that for all they're wrestling with in terms of Biblical
fidelity, Dominionism seems to be a driving force and one utilized by these
leaders to bring their people over into the Right-wing activist camp – a case
of out of the frying pan and into the fire. As far as their less than robust theological
conservatism, that also resonates with my experience and interactions with
these groups. If I can paint with a broad brush it seems like what I have often
encountered in these circles are people that are best described as being
Conservative-leaning liberals or liberals with conservative intuitions.
There was another small moment of confusion as one of the
guests seemed to assume that Congregationalism implied democratic rule within
the Church. That is a form Congregationalism that is commonly found in
Evangelical and Baptist-type churches. But in historic Congregationalism it was
not so – as one might witness in something like The Savoy Declaration (1658).
It was elder-ruled and as such is sometimes (if erroneously) labeled as a kind
of Independent Presbyterianism. Like the latter system there is a plurality of
elders in the local congregation but historic Congregationalism stops there.
The wider relations between congregations exist but are informal and
non-binding while in the Presbyterian system you also have regional bodies of
clerics called Presbyteries which are in fact the primary organ of governance
and authority within the system. The kind of (uniquely American) democratic
congregationalism the guest referred to is not exactly part of the UCC's
historic Congregational heritage. Indeed the UCC congregations with German and
Hungarian roots that I have been familiar with retain the Continental Reformed
lexicon when it comes to polity, and like the Dutch, instead of a 'session' of
elders they have a consistory and so forth.
In the American-style congregational model there are
sometimes deacons which possess a very limited degree of power and who are
often rivaled by the interests (at certain points) of Trustees – an office
primarily defined (in the contemporary American context) by the IRS tax code
which is required for all non-profit corporations –which is (legally) what
these churches become when they register with the state. In some churches the
elders are also the trustees, while in others the system creates a parallel or
rival power structure between the two groups. But even in those cases the
primary day-to-day power rests with the pastor and the congregation's authority
to vote him in or out. Needless to say this model (and its various
permutations) is not in accord with New Testament polity even though it is a
type of congregationalism.
That said, many of the old forms of Congregationalism were
also problematic. In New England for example during the colonial period they
were effectively state churches and were funded through tax revenues. As such,
there was a functional degree of dishonesty about how these institutions
related to one another.
In the end, there's really no hope of reforming the UCC as
the guests acknowledge. What they're doing is trying to capture some relatively
conservative remnants from within that framework. They mentioned the buildings
which is also an interesting point. These are old congregations and in many cases
were once quite large and so the buildings can be grand and historic. For some
this represents something positive and worth saving, an added bonus to trying
to work within that framework. For my part, while the buildings are of
historical interest, in terms of theology they are something of an albatross.
People sometimes stay because their family names are on plaques and inset into
stained glass windows. Often high church elements have crept in over time and so
one finds it rather difficult to dispense with the organ music and the acolytes
lighting candles in procession and the like without facing a great deal of
resistance. For small congregations of thirty or forty people a massive
building is not a blessing but a terrible burden. I realize in many cases these
congregations have trust funds that keep them going and pay for maintenance.
This is also from my perspective highly problematic but in the grand scheme of
things is so far down the list as to scarcely warrant address.
As mentioned, there are basically two groups of people that
find these conservative UCC scenarios appealing – old mainline folks that are
looking for something more conservative but want to retain the building and the
heritage and traditions it represents. In other cases the appeal is found for
those who don't quite fit in with a lot of the conservative Evangelical and
Confessional groups and their tendency to generate schism through their
restrictive polities and membership demands.
I was pleased to hear these UCC men in Pennsylvania aren't
looking to affiliate with denominations, even dismissing joining something like
the CCCC – another body that I have some familiarity with. Others I have
encountered are looking toward something like the Evangelical Presbyterian
Church (EPC) which to them is conservative but from my standpoint is not. The
EPC broke from the mainline PCUSA over issues surrounding sodomy and yet they
have not built their house (as it were) on a proper foundation of Biblical
authority. Instead they still embrace a great deal of theological liberalism
and as such ordain women. This is simply to roll back the clock a few decades –
and in a few decades more these perverse ideologies will worm their way back
into these bodies, in addition to a great many of the worldly assumptions and
patterns of thinking that have already been embraced.
Years ago one would occasionally hear of a conservative
outlier congregation in the PCUSA or among the United Methodists. I pursued
some of these leads and was not impressed and I think some of these
'conservatives' (who really weren't) have by now been forced out – as the
Global Methodists and EPC now testify.
There are little bursts of light to be found at times and in
places we might not expect to find them. As such I have always been driven to
'look in' on UCC congregations and the like – just to see if there's any spark
of gospel light left. Most of the time
I'm met with disappointment but as these guests testify, there are exceptions.