Posted on 10/21/2013 10:54:23 AM PDT by markomalley
BOBBY ASKS:
Who are the “Mainline” Protestants today?
DOUGLAS LIKEWISE ASKS:
(Paraphrasing) What do we make of proposals for “Mainline” Protestants to drop that label for themselves? And where does that leave me, an “evangelical” who remains in the Episcopal Church “as a grain of sand in the oyster”?
THE GUY ANSWERS:
The dictionary definition of “mainline” signals mainstream prestige, so “Mainline” Protestantism’s decline over recent decades could mean this designation has long since outlived its usefulness. In his email, Douglas considers it “adjectival mayhem.”
The discussion has been renewed by the Christian Century magazine, often considered the bible of the Mainline or at least of the Mainline Left, such that Elesha Coffman’s new history is titled “The Christian Century and the Rise of Mainline Protestantism” (from the excellent Oxford University Press). The book provoked a piece for the “Century” by Carol Howard Merritt urging fellow “progressives” to rebrand: “It’s time to discard that tired label that ties us too closely with a particular race and class. It’s time to call forth another name.” Gary Dorrien of Union Theological Seminary agreed via the First Things journal that the Mainline was “unfortunately named” and “liberal” or “ecumenical” would be “slightly better” adjectives.
Some context: The inexorable shrinkage among Mainline Protestant churches since the 1960s — and simultaneous growth among non-Mainliners, though lately plateauing in some cases — is a sweeping trend that has reshaped American religion. It ranks in significance with the large influx of immigrant Asians and Hispanics. The origins of the commonly used Mainline label are obscure (anyone have information on that?). But it certainly raises thoughts of suburban Philadelphia and “Establishment” standing.
The Guy’s definition: The predominantly white, long-existing, and relatively affluent U.S. Protestant denominations with pluralistic theology, which are easily categorized by ecumenical affiliations with the National Council of Churches and World Council of Churches (alongside major African-American and Orthodox denominations).
We’re talking about (in order of size) the United Methodist Church, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, Presbyterian Church (USA), Episcopal Church, American Baptist Churches, United Church of Christ, Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), and several smaller bodies often called the “Seven Sisters.” Together they remain an important bloc with 20 million adherents, but that compares with 30 million at the end of the 1960s, an unprecedented slump as memberships both declined and aged.
Meanwhile, these groups generally floated leftward, in doctrine, politics and culture.
At some point the Protestant majority shifted outside the Mainline to a loose collection consisting of Evangelicals, Fundamentalists, Pentecostals, Charismatics, churches bound by traditional creeds, countless independent congregations, and minor schisms off the Mainline. Informal worship, bands with ear-splitting amplifiers, clever programming and marketing may explain some success more than theology. But there’s little doubt that leaders confident in their conservative beliefs about Jesus Christ and the Bible have been all-important. Think of it as the Billy Graham Era (though the Southern Baptist evangelist, who turns 95 on Nov. 7, welcomed hosts of Mainline supporters to his crusades).
Dorrien thinks Coffman’s history supports the “cultural victory” thesis, “that liberal Protestantism succeeded by insinuating its values into American culture.” Win the cultural war for gauzy tolerance and sophistication. Lose the religious battle. That’s cold comfort for pastors and lay leaders trying to preserve their local congregations.
Cathy Lynn Grossman of Religion News Service suggests replacement labels, some of them tongue-in-cheek: “Old Line,” “Liberal Church,” “Grandma’s Church,” “Christians-Formerly-Known-As-Mainline,” “New Coke,” “Vintage Protestants,” “VPCC: Vanishing Progressive Christian Church,” “Legacy Church” or else let’s “forget labels” altogether.
Asked to pick their favorite, 24 percent of RNS readers said “Liberal Church.”
Problem is, that’s an L-word many Mainline strategists prefer to shun, even when it applies. More important, scads of Mainliners are conservatives like Douglas. Pew Research Center surveys show “traditionalists” in belief are one-fourth of today’s Mainline members. Despite ongoing conservative walkouts, Mainline Evangelicals akin to Douglas cherish their church heritage though oftentimes — yes — treated as the irritating “grain of sand in the oyster” rather than appreciated as a useful source of spiritual energy, not to mention offering-plate money.
Would The Guy drop the old label now that the Mainline is on the sidelines? Probably not. It has long been in use, there’s no good agreed alternative, and it accurately depicts historic cultural positioning (for instance, scan the affiliations of the Protestants in Congress). But admittedly the label is off key in terms of 21st Century U.S. church dynamics. Oh, and despite its huge membership Catholicism isn’t the American mainline, either.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Questions for Richard Ostling? Leave them in the comments pages.
I would be interested to hear others' opinion on the subject.
Well I sure hope they do something. I am increasingly concerned by the sight of old-line Protestant churches going out-of-business one by one, only to re-open as mosques. Rather have the Presbyterians there anyday.
Mainline ==> Jew-Hating Social Gospel Secular Progressive.
The GetReligion author refers to the publication Christian Century as being "often considered the bible of the Mainline or at least of the Mainline Left". I don't know of anyone theologically sound, or not on the Left, who has thought this.
Perhaps that is a sign of God’s judgment upon liberal Protestantism, i.e., the replacement of churches who abandoned Him and His holy word with mosques here and in Europe. And I say this as a Presbyterian(PCA not PCUSA variety).
The large majority of “Mainline” churches are not recognizably Christian. They have pretty much poisoned the term, along with the reputations of the denominations that belong to them.
Other than being a refuge for homosexual advocates and liberal/radical activists, the rest of the folks have largely left. Like a cancer the non-Christians remaining are living off the properties and endowment funds of these institutions. But the money is quickly running out and the mainline denominations will die.
Which is in line with God’s plans at this point. If you reject the Spirit through immorality and blasphemy, He will leave and the church will die.
At some point the Protestant majority shifted outside the Mainline to a loose collection consisting of Evangelicals, Fundamentalists, Pentecostals, Charismatics, churches bound by traditional creeds, countless independent congregations, and minor schisms off the Mainline.
Some of those "minor schisms" are actually growing and may well be larger than the mainline church they spintered away from.
There’s no reason for them to continue to exist. I mean if you embrace secular paganism, why would you want to go to a church?
For example...
http://attawheed.org/index.php
Former “mainline” church near Pittsburgh. A mosque that formerly used to meet in a local motel. Big Saudi money. Their prior imam left the country after a bit of investigative journalism in the Pittsburgh Trib.
Yep
Wow. That mosque even looks like a church. I thought that would possibly go against Mohammedan rules? Then again, look what they did to Hagia Sofia(formerly an Eastern Orthodox church) in Istanbul.
Sadly, I grew up in one of those mainline denominations that in the beginning was on fire for God. I grew up with Spirit-filled parents, and grandparents, one who was a circuit rider in his day. Even in my youth, my parents were in the minority, and only very rarely did the assigned preacher(s) have any interest in the Word, much less anything the Spirit might say. It was simply their job, a paycheck, and if they were truly called by God to the ministry, they demonstrated very little of the Spiritual Fruit that you would expect.
The churches/ministries I see that are growing and changing lives now are usually the result of anointed men or women teaching the Word. That growth continues as long as God remains in charge. Once they organize into a denomination, grow into a large institution and/or put men in charge, they turn to ceremonies and religious tradition. There is nothing worse than sitting in the pew of a spiritually dead church. Might as well head to the Cineplex, at least it will be entertaining.
True worship is Spiritual. When the focus is completely on the flesh, and man’s inventions designed to entertain the senses, it has no Life in it. God’s Word is Spirit, Life, and Truth. The flesh profiteth nothing. (John 6:63) Jesus came to give Abundant LIFE, and churches turn it into dead religion, not much better than what Jesus condemned in his time on Earth. (Matthew 23, John 10:10, Philippians 3)
The good news is that denominations may be withering, but the Body of Christ is ALWAYS growing. Jesus is present wherever Believers gather. Whether its an underground church in Pakistan, or a big sanctuary full of Believers here in the states, where people are gathered in the Name of Jesus, he is there.
21“Woman,” Jesus replied, “believe me, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. 22You Samaritans worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews. 23Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. 24God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth.” John 4 - Every time this discussion comes up, I think of Jesus’ conversation with the Samaritan woman.
I have never seen a church with “Mainline” in their label
Congregationalists and Methodists and Baptists and Quakers might have thought of themselves as "modernists" or theological "liberals," but Episcopalians, Lutherans, and Presbyterians tended to think of themselves as heirs to the large national churches of Europe and above the liberal-conservative dichotomy.
Those days are gone. Now a minority, they might as well accept the liberal label or another label that doesn't lay claim to majority status.
I'm an outsider to all this too. Whatever the theological rights and wrongs, it's a little sad to see all the familiar brands one knew growing up fading from the scene. Like Woolworth's or A&P or Gimbels, Borders or Circuit City.
How about now calling them “whitened sepulchres”?
I agree — rather Alex Murphy than Ali Mohammed :-P
Liberals target one kirk and then another and then say "oh look, the ECUSA says ok..."
Which is afflicting you, Cronos? The pain, or the mud?
Yup.
I grew up in he PC(USA) and didn't realize how toxic it had become until 2002.
For a variety of reasons we were not in a PC(USA) church from 1994-2002. During our absence we spent 5 years in a PCA church and when we moved back to a city where we had been members of PC(USA) church we visited. Our thinking was "OUR CHURCH isn't like those others you read about in the paper.." Halfway through the service my wife leaned over and told me to never take her to that church again.. I told her it was all I could do not to walk out.
Breaks my heart.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.