Viewing this brief sketch of influencing factors, is it any wonder that the church in America is so devastatingly fractured? Endeavoring to overcome the deficiencies of the European model of one church body delineated by geopolitical considerations, the American church unwittingly adopted a paradigm that would eventually snowball into a Medusian nightmare which, in some ways is more threatening than the catholic model could be.

We are a great distance from the ideal paradigm ordered by the founder of the church. He insisted that it was the purpose of his Father that all who embraced the way of the cross become one, even as he and the Father are One. A cursory reading of the teachings of Jesus Christ reveals to the simplest of minds that unity is paramount in the church. The fracturing and fragmenting that has shattered the church denies it of its very essence. Why, then are we confronted with this broken, splintered caricature. How has it come to be that over 200 years after the Christian church was established in America there is no abatement of schism, rather exponential growth.

The Distinctives Made Us Do It!

We have looked obliquely at basic elements underlying the phenomenon of schism in the American church. Let us now probe a bit deeper into the causations which continue to feed this monster. The schism evident in the American church, was as we have seen, caused primarily by ethnic, political and economic influences. The fragmentation of this church rose quite naturally out of these causes. But, as time ticked itself into nonexistence the causations now began to move in a different direction. A direction that surfaces at points throughout church history. These facets are so complex they lie hidden in the psyche of the race. They reared their heads at the very inception of the church. Jesus had to contend with them. These days we have names for them: Egos.

The human ego should be one of the seven wonders of the world. For some reason it demands that it be unique, one of a kind, distinctive. People go to great lengths to demonstrate that distinction. Thus we have clubs, societies, interest groups, political parties, closed communities, and on could go the list of ego driven clusters of humanity. This is sociological in nature. Knowing the right people, attending the right schools, buying at the right stores, the right labels. Living in the right neighborhood, driving the right car, marrying the right spouse. Supporting the right political party. Well... you get the picture. When you do everything right, you are right!

All of this "rightness" leads to distinction. The composite of "rightness" creates a set of distinctives. Subscribing to these "distinctives" sets one apart from the rest of the pack.

Thus, a person who joins the Rotary is a cut above the one who joins the Kiwanis. One who drives a Mercedes is distinct from the person who drives a Ford. For the Mercedes, which costs much more than the Ford, is a mark of "distinction". Or so it goes.

Now, we know, in our heart of hearts that is a lot of bullroar. Only the human ego could come up with such nonsense. Howbeit, driving a Mercedes would be more pleasing than the Ford, but the man behind the wheel doesn't change when he moves from Ford to Mercedes. He might think he changes, but we know, don't we, that he has the same warts in the Mercedes that he did in the Ford.

So, we can only conclude that distinctives are a manufacture of the human ego, and possess the same quality as the warts mentioned above. The tragedy of this is that this foolishness has found a home in the church. Jesus condemned the notion of distinctives. The disciples witnessed a fellow casting out demons in Jesus name. Reporting the incident to Jesus, with some indignation, they reminded Jesus that the fellow was not a member of the club. Jesus, with disdain, said, what club? He who is for me is not against me. I don't believe in clubs.

When the Ego Brothers put in their bid for the loge seats next to the Man, Jesus reminded them that they may not want to pay the price for such a distinction. The price? The laying down of the human ego and taking up a cross to keep it there. The Man for Others invites them to empty themselves, which would require that they forsake the very privilege they so eagerly desired.

On another occasion, when the Seventy Two returned from the mission Jesus had sent them on they exuberantly reported that they had acquired a distinctive: "even the demons were subject to us!"

Jesus responded, my children, you may now go out and found the First Church of Exorcists and develop your ministry. Start a Bible School. Go on TV. Tell the world what sets you apart!

No! No! No! Jesus merely said to them, that's no big deal. That doesn't matter. What does matter is your relationship with me. Rejoice that your names are written in the lamb's book of life. That is the "only" distinctive you need.

It is this ego thing that lies behind most of the schism in the body of Christ, historically and the world over. One person or a group of persons, seize upon the moment of controversy and parlay that into yet another splinter in the fractured church. The actions which ensue are inevitably justified under the rubric, "God has raised us up to bear witness" to.... Pick your poison: the correct way to hang the draperies, the right way to baptize, the right way to observe the Lord's Supper, the right way to receive the Holy Spirit. Or the right color for the sanctuary carpet. Or it could be the correct theology relative to: the end time, church polity, mission, the Eucharist, social involvement, the day one worships, holiness, and on and on and on it goes.

Justification for the schism invariably points to the "Distinctive" being championed as the identifying factor which can only be emphasized by forming "our own group." We must fellowship only with those of like precious faith. And so, the words of Jesus are ignored, the disciples rejoice in their "distinctive" and one more fissure appears.

Though we Pentecostals are not alone in this abberation, we are a prime example of theological distancing in order to emphasize our distinctives, particularly speaking in tongues as the primary evidence of Spirit baptism. Indeed, is our position in the larger church so tenuous, are our collective egos so fragile that we need to claim uniqueness. What exactly is the motivation which lies behind this need to be distinctive, rather than taking our God-given and ordained place in the larger church which He has established in the earth?

The term distinctive bears upon it the connotation of being "special." Are we actually special in the sense that God cares more for us than the rest of Christ's body on the earth? Are we special in the sense that God has granted to us a revelation of His Person and Purpose which He has not revealed to any other Christian group? Do we really want to claim that for ourselves? If that is the connotation attached to our use of the term, then we are to be pitied. Either we stand with all Christians, past, present and future, within the stream of salvation history, or we need not lay claim to the name Christian.

We must acknowledge that we stand on the shoulders of untold millions of God's saints who have made this sojourn before us, most of whom we would not label as being Pentecostal, and that we are but an infinitesimal part of the overall history of the Church of Jesus Christ. This is not said to denigrate modern Pentecostal history nor the value of our tenets of faith, rather, merely to remind us Pentecostals that the revelation of God in Christ did not begin with our twentieth century movement and shall not end with it. In the overall picture of Christ's church we are but a drop in the bucket. The Church of Jesus Christ was here when we arrived upon the scene and it will be here when we are gone.

If we insist on claiming this uniqueness we must be reminded that "specialness" with God brings with it a tremendous burden of responsibility which denotes that we must become the leadership of the entire Christian church. We must be the example to the rest of the larger church in all of its life and ministry, not just in spirituality. We had better think that one through before we take to ourselves that responsibility. Israel believed that they were a people called by God to be special, but only in the sense of privilege, responsibility lay far from their minds. Somehow I believe that we Pentecostals often share that mentality.

It's the Operating System!

Sinners, being what they are, act like sinners. They just naturally gravitate toward fragmentation. When the programmer, who wrote the disk operating system that Bill Gates purchased and eventually named MS-DOS, created his program he wrote it in such a way that it would randomly poke pieces of a file at various addresses on the disk, floppy or hard.

Over time, as the disk gets more and more data stored on it DOS finds space to poke the file fragments into, all over the disk, often tracks and sectors apart. When this occurs, the disk is said to need defragging, which is computerese that means that pieces of given files are stored in so many places on the disk that the whole system, in searching for the pieces, slows down and sort of becomes constipated.

To correct this condition one must run a defragmenting utility which will restore order to the files and speed up access to them. The fragmented files are stored on the disk contiguously. That is, the entire given file is stored on the same track(s) in related sectors.

Human beings are much like that operating system, including Christians. Their operating system just naturally fragments the files of life. Fragmentation is a given. God expects it. What surprises God is when we get it right. The defragging utility God uses on us is the cross of Christ. If we allow it.

All of that to say, one of the most serious fragmentings of the American church was the evolvement of the Fundamentalist-Modernist Controversy. This phenomenon touched almost every segment of the already fractured American church and sent it into a tailspin that it is still trying to stabilize. The schism caused by that controversy produced a prolific spirit of disunity that continues to spew out new splinters and disunities on a regular basis. The Pentecostal movement is an end product of that fiasco and a perfect example of the failure of the American church to resort to dialogue in resolving differences. It was easier to ostracize and ridicule. The Pentecostals then splintered into various groups, becoming the present day denominations.

There is a notion that describes this phenomenon. We call it heresy, which basically means, self-willed opinion. Heresy is not new to the church. It has a long and lively history. That is where the rub comes. It is history! The modern church disdains the challenge that heresy brings.

It is easier to fracture than to censure. Let the erring take their marbles and go somewhere else to play. Let them open another franchise down the street or across town. After all God respects diversity. We can't all be red roses. Yes, God does respect diversity, nature shows us that is true. But, it must be diversity in unity, and schism is not unity.

That is not the way the church has historically handled the matter of self-willed opinion. Beginning with the Council of Jerusalem to the Council of Trent heresy was handled through the use of the forum. The church gathered to determine what was truth and what was error, and in making the determination, invited the erring one(s) to embrace the truth. This was a lengthy process, but one which allows believers at this point in time to rest with confidence in what is truth.

That was then, this is now. The church has not contended with the fragmentation we see today. However, that does not preclude the value of the council as a forum for determining and embracing the truth as it is in Christ Jesus.

The greatest mitigating factor against a council to determine truth is that flag which gets waved called "distinctives." Would the various fractures, fragments, splinters and spin-offs which comprise the American church be willing to lay their "distinctives" on the table for scrutiny at a duly called council of the American church? A council that would link itself with the last council of the church, relying on the historical precedent in determining the truth.

Schism in the church is tolerated for the simple reason that any effort to deal with it effectively would result in the loss of fiefdoms for the powerful. Egos stand firmly in the way of unity.

For all of its foibles, the Ecumenical Movement was opposed by Fundamentalists and many Evangelicals, for reasons more akin to the above than any real theological issue. Viewed as a Modernist plot to subdue the church, the ecumenism being proffered was vilified as sinister and viewed as a work of the devil. Submerged in rigorous opposition, these people failed to hear the voice of Christ calling his church to unity. However one may view that period of ecumenism, and it did have its problems, at least it was an effort to move toward unity.

As one studies the history of ecumenism it is interesting to observe that it was the "distinctives" that torpedoed the movement. The various segments of the American church, which did participate in the dialogue, could not get beyond the sacrifice of their "distinctives" to the basic notion that our fellowship centers on Jesus Christ and not some theological notion or construct, nor some practice of polity.

Would the various "distinctives" determined to be heresy, by a modern day council, be surrendered for truth. Would those "distinctives" which survived the scrutiny be embraced as truth by the council? Or would the cudgel of scripture be drawn and truth bludgeoned for the sake of ego(s) and the desire to be right, even if it is self-willed opinion.

We probably will never know. "...for truth is fallen in the street, and equity cannot enter." Isa. 59:14.

Its that operating system!

Jesus said, "that they may be one." "By this shall all men know that you are my disciples, that you love one another." "You shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free...." Its in the Book!

Back to Archives Page

© 1999, Larry Newman