Evangelical Free Church of America

[Maxirad]

How does it compare to the Catholic Church?

 

[ltwin]

It is Protestant. As its name suggests, it is evangelical and it is a “free church.”

The term “Free” refers to the fact that churches practice congregational governance. In other words every member of the congregation in good standing partakes in decision making. It also refers to the freedom and autonomy that each individual church enjoys within the larger denomination.

It is not technically a “church” in the ecclesiological sense that the Catholic Church is a “church.” It is, in its own words, “an association of autonomous churches united around these theological convictions.” The “theological convictions” are expressed in the EFCA Statement of Faith.

In summary, these are:

1. The Trinity,
2. Verbal inspiration of the Bible. It is “without error in the original writings, the complete revelation of His will for salvation, and the ultimate authority by which every realm of human knowledge and endeavor should be judged.” In other words, they adhere to a form of Sola Scriptura.
3. They believe the “human condition” is one where, “In union with Adam, human beings are sinners by nature and by choice, alienated from God, and under His wrath.”
4. The** Incarnation, death, burial, resurrection, and ascension** of Jesus Christ.
5. The “work of Christ” is: “that Jesus Christ, as our representative and substitute, shed His blood on the cross as the perfect, all-sufficient sacrifice for our sins. His atoning death and victorious resurrection constitute the only ground for salvation.”
6. The Church is made up of “all who have been justified by God’s grace through faith alone in Christ alone” and is manifested in local churches, which should be composed only of believers, i.e. only those who have confessed faith in Christ can be members. Two ordinances: Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. “Though they are not the means of salvation, when celebrated by the church in genuine faith, these ordinances confirm and nourish the believer.”
7. They “believe that God’s justifying grace must not be separated from His sanctifying power and purpose. God commands us to love Him supremely and others sacrificially, and to live out our faith with care for one another, compassion toward the poor and justice for the oppressed. . . . .”
8. They “believe in the personal, bodily and premillennial return of our Lord Jesus Christ.” No one knows when this will happen.
9. They “believe that God commands everyone everywhere to believe the gospel by turning to Him in** repentance and receiving the Lord Jesus Christ**.” They believe in a literal Heaven and a literal Hell.

As stated above, they are an association of autonomous churches united in common theology and congregational governance. They have an annual national conference that is sort of a legislative body. It is representative, including pastors and congregational delegates. Congregations are grouped into jurisdictions called “districts,” which are analogous to dioceses.

It does not have bishops. Officers include a president, moderator, secretary and treasurer among others. Ministers are credentialed by the denomination, not the local congregation.

 

[ltwin]

I should also mention that “Free Church” also has historical meaning. The ECFA originates from Scandinavian immigrants who split off from the Lutheran State churches. Therefore, “free” refers historically to the fact that the ECFA is free from state control.

 

[Maxirad]

How does LifeChurch.tv compare to the Evangelical Free Church of America?

 

[ltwin]

How does LifeChurch.tv compare to the Evangelical Free Church of America?

LifeChurch.tv is a member of a denomination called the Evangelical Covenant Church.

The Evangelical Covenant Church (ECC) has a somewhat similar history to the EFree Church. The ECC was founded by Swedish immigrants. They were part of the pietist movement in European Lutheranism. This was a movement that sought to spiritually renew Lutheran churches, and it contributes to modern evangelicalism.

Therefore, the ECC has been historically Lutheran (with a pietist flavor). However, today, like the EFree Church, it is broadly evangelical.

I have no idea how typical LifeChurch.tv is of other ECC churches or how it compares to a typical EFree church.

 

[Jon_S_1]

How does it compare to the Catholic Church?

twin mentioned a lot of good valid points.

I want to add, that you really can’t go to an EFCA church. The EFCA is a loose organization with the goal of networking the various Evangelical Churches, as well as some non denominational churches. As twin mentioned, free means free of any type of authority outside of the individual church. At the church I went to, the elders and Senior Pastor had a balance of power, followed by a general board of leaders/deacons, and then the congregation at large. Major decisions are typically handled democratically leaving the freedom in the people, of course a downside to this is doctrinal disunity. The EFCA is a way of helping keep a semblance of doctrinal unity, although if a church left the EFCA, it really would not affect their day to day at all and most of the congregation would not realize it at all.

Naturally you can see how very different from Catholicism this is. Of course in addition to the governance of the church issues, there are the standard protestant differences; faith alone, sola scripture, one saved always saved (in some churches), no sacraments, 2 ordinances (baptism and communion-both symbolic).

One area that there is much agreement on between the two churches is morality issues. The rights of the unborn/sanctity of marriage, primarily, and increasingly issues of serving the poor and immigration reform have been emphasized more heavily.

Because of our great commonality in the areas of morality, and our common belief about the nature of the triune God, Evangelicalism is a promising area of working together with Catholicism, and although probably extremely unlikely that they would ever come home to Rome, the chances of a close allegiance is high.

You may enjoy reading “Is the Reformation Over” by Mark Knoll, and Evangelical Historian

Also, about 20 years ago a document entitled “Evangelicals and Catholics Together” was drafted. It was pretty controversial at the time, but I would say is more widely accepted in theory today. You can read it here: ewtn.com/library/issues/evancath.txt

 

[AbideWithMe]

I should also mention that “Free Church” also has historical meaning. The ECFA originates from Scandinavian immigrants who split off from the Lutheran State churches. Therefore, “free” refers historically to the fact that the ECFA is free from state control.

Yes, I was going to add this. The “Free Church” in the name comes from the idea that it was originally a merger of Lutheran-derived churches that were not sponsored by the government.

 

[ltwin]

twin mentioned a lot of good valid points.

What is their position on predestination/free will? I didn’t see anything clearly stated on their website. Is this something left up to the local church?

Also, I’m assuming that local churches are free to withdraw from the EFree Church with their property intact?

Just one more last question, since the EFree has roots in Scandinavia, do you notice any parallels with Lutheranism?

 

[ltwin]

Yes, I was going to add this. The “Free Church” in the name comes from the idea that it was originally a merger of Lutheran-derived churches that were not sponsored by the government.

Could you tell me if there are any Lutheran influences still remaining today?

What about things like predestination/free will and other controversial doctrines. Do they try to include diverse doctrinal perspectives as long as they are “evangelical”?

 

[Jon_S_1]

What is their position on predestination/free will? I didn’t see anything clearly stated on their website. Is this something left up to the local church?

Also, I’m assuming that local churches are free to withdraw from the EFree Church with their property intact?

Just one more last question, since the EFree has roots in Scandinavia, do you notice any parallels with Lutheranism?

Honestly I would say there is absolutely no semblance of Lutheranism as I understand Lutheranism (somewhat limited).

 

[Jon_S_1]

What is their position on predestination/free will? I didn’t see anything clearly stated on their website. Is this something left up to the local church?

This is largely left up to the individual churches and the pastor they select. Overall I would say they are more Calvinistic than Lutheran, meaning a heavier emphasis on predestination than free will. Very few though are 5 point Calvinists. They generally fall in the middle somewhere often saying they are 3 point calvinists, often there is a heavy baptist influence, more so than lutheranism. We often looked at lutherans as closer to Catholics than Evangelicals.

Also, I’m assuming that local churches are free to withdraw from the EFree Church with their property intact?

Yes, the EFCA does not own any of the churches. It really is not a denomination in the formal sense. The churches are 100% independent and use the EFCA for networking and sometimes for guidance in understanding how other churches tackled a certain issue. The EFCA could be seen more like a trade organization rather than a licensing agency to make an analogy.

 

[Jon_S_1]

How does LifeChurch.tv compare to the Evangelical Free Church of America?

I don’t know much about this church particularly, but in browsing their website it looked pretty in line with a typical large (mega) EFCA church.

I noticed, that the church was founded in 1996 by the current pastor. Although a noble cause, it ends up being a church that surrounds a dynamic pastor/speaker or something else unique about it. They identify with their pastor more than any doctrinal statement or creed.

As such, you have to be cautious because their is really no oversight and the pastor can pretty much say whatever he wants. Sometimes they are pretty right on and no Catholic would object to the message, but often times they can come up with some strange ideas (i.e. the prosperity gospel of Joel Olsteen, or the Power of Positive thinking by Schuller, or the Authoritarianism of MacArthur, etc…)

They all have their corner of the market

 

[AbideWithMe]

Could you tell me if there are any Lutheran influences still remaining today?

In my area, the southeast quarter of Pennsylvania where the actual Lutheran churches in America first took root, yes, there are still some Lutheran influences. I live in an area that is still predominately Lutheran among the mainline churches, so here, the EFree churches may still commonly baptise infants. Then again, I’ve known an EFree church around here to have a formerly Baptist pastor, so the infant baptisms were still okay, but downplayed.

Regarding free will, honestly, I haven’t seen any vestiges of Lutheran “soft” monergism left in the EFree churches that I’ve come across. I grew up in a PA German Methodist-derived church, which was definitely Arminian, and definitely not OSAS. That church, the Evangelical Congregational Church, and the EFree churches round here, often swap members as people move, and our two denominations work together a lot, so there’s much cross-pollination between us, even though historically, Lutheran and Methodist churches would have been more distinct from each other in doctrine.

 

[ltwin]

In my area, the southeast quarter of Pennsylvania where the actual Lutheran churches in America first took root, yes, there are still some Lutheran influences. I live in an area that is still predominately Lutheran among the mainline churches, so here, the EFree churches may still commonly baptise infants. Then again, I’ve known an EFree church around here to have a formerly Baptist pastor, so the infant baptisms were still okay, but downplayed.

Oh wow. So some churches baptize infants. Does each church pick which method it uses or is it more left up to the parents to decide if they want their child baptized or not?

 

[Jon_S_1]

In my area, the southeast quarter of Pennsylvania where the actual Lutheran churches in America first took root, yes, there are still some Lutheran influences. I live in an area that is still predominately Lutheran among the mainline churches, so here, the EFree churches may still commonly baptise infants. Then again, I’ve known an EFree church around here to have a formerly Baptist pastor, so the infant baptisms were still okay, but downplayed.

Regarding free will, honestly, I haven’t seen any vestiges of Lutheran “soft” monergism left in the EFree churches that I’ve come across. I grew up in a PA German Methodist-derived church, which was definitely Arminian, and definitely not OSAS. That church, the Evangelical Congregational Church, and the EFree churches round here, often swap members as people move, and our two denominations work together a lot, so there’s much cross-pollination between us, even though historically, Lutheran and Methodist churches would have been more distinct from each other in doctrine.

Case in point!

I am in Southern California and had a very different experience! We did baby dedications (where is that in the Bible) but anyway, maybe that was some sort of hold over from lutheranism.

So this should show how the EFCA is a very loose knit organization, unlike most denominations.

 

[AbideWithMe]

This is largely left up to the individual churches and the pastor they select. Overall I would say they are more Calvinistic than Lutheran, meaning a heavier emphasis on predestination than free will. Very few though are 5 point Calvinists. They generally fall in the middle somewhere often saying they are 3 point calvinists, often there is a heavy baptist influence, more so than lutheranism. We often looked at lutherans as closer to Catholics than Evangelicals.

Perhaps the Calvinist influence is regional. I think, though, that officially EFree churches should not be leaning towards Calvinism,
though I don’t have any reference off the top of my head to support that, and it’s late here.

 

[AbideWithMe]

Oh wow. So some churches baptize infants. Does each church pick which method it uses or is it more left up to the parents to decide if they want their child baptized or not?

It seemed to be up to the parents, with pastoral counsel. I’ve read some history of why the EFCA is one of the few churches that allows people to choose infant or believer’s baptism, but I don’t have the articles at hand, cyberspace-ly speaking.

 

[AbideWithMe]

Case in point!

I am in Southern California and had a very different experience! We did baby dedications (where is that in the Bible) but anyway, maybe that was some sort of hold over from lutheranism.

So this should show how the EFCA is a very loose knit organization, unlike most denominations.

True. The EFCA also made a point to deliberately allow either kind of baptism, which ended up with some churches diminishing the importance of baptism, so they officially firmed up the statement on the importance of baptism a few years ago.

 

[Cat]

An Evangelical Free Church of America was the last Protestant church that we ever attended.

After seven years of loyal service in that church, my husband and I, along with our daughters, were ousted and shunned by a tribunal of strangers assembled for the purpose of ousting us.

The reason we were ousted is authority issues. **I would caution any and all Protestants who are members of the autonomous churches to GET OUT or at the very least, watch your back (and your sides and your top and bottom, too). ** Especially watch over your children.

I was asked to take over the children’s choir in the church (the director wanted to move into directing the adult choir). I agreed, but for the next three years, I had a dreadful time trying to figure out who exactly was my “authority.” I thought it was the music committee, but they referred me to the pastor, and he said it was all up to me.

So I made my own decisions, and then I was accused by the associate pastors of “failing to submit to authority” and also by a female pastor (Children’s Ministries) of conducting a ministry that hurt the children. THANK GOD I always conducted my choir rehearsal with other adults (parents) present in the room with me, so there was no overt accusation of sexual improprieties. That would have ruined my life, as I am much involved in children’s activities (music, drama) in our city. The issue of sexual impropriety did come up, but when I reminded the accusers that other adult parents were always in the room, the accusers backed down. They saw that they didn’t have a leg to stand on.

Interestingly, NONE of the parents of the children’s choir members were present at the tribunal. A year later, I discovered that they were told that I decided to leave the church. They said that they went to the pastor and asked what really happened, but no one would tell them anything. They really liked me as a director; in the three years that I was in charge of the children’s choir, it grew from 24 kids to over 60 kids.

A year after we were ousted, we were told by the one person in the church who continued to be friends with us that the female pastor had been fired after she was caught in a lie (involving finances). So it seems that she was a pathological liar from the beginning. However, we never received any call from the church apologizing for their nightmarish treatment of our family.

As for the accusations of failing to submit to authority, these were especially horrific accusations, because they involved both my husband and me and our decisions about raising our children. At one point, our daughter was dating a young man (who 7 years later became her husband). They wanted to sit together during youth group, but the youth minister didn’t believe in teenaged dating, and wanted them to sit apart. My husband and I told the youth pastor that we preferred them to sit together, as we believed that it was important for them to develop their faith together and learn how to serve in the church . We had dated young and married young, and believed in this practice. However, we also told the youth pastor that we would ask our daughter and her boyfriend to comply with the rules. (As it turned out, they stopped attending the Sunday morning youth classes, as my daughter was skating on an elite synchro team in the Big City, and she could no longer attend any Sunday morning activities.

And that’s ANOTHER accusation that the youth pastors made against us–that we took our daughter out of church because of skating–nonsense! She still attended the Wednesday evening youth activities as long as her sister was at home. BUT…she refused to enter the church unless either we (her parents), her sister, or her boyfriend was with her. We suspect that there was some kind of sexual abuse or crime, maybe just an exposure. But when we came home from the tribunal, our daughter was crying and saying, “I told you, all those seven years I told you that that church was EVIL EVIL EVIL! We should have left. I told you so!”

At one point during our tenure in that church, we went to the associate pastor and told him that our daughter didn’t seem to have any friends in the youth group (she was Miss Popularity at her high school), and we asked if perhaps he and the other leaders would see if they could get some of the kids in the youth group to be-friend our daughter.

At the tribunal, this was brought up, only it was twisted. The tribunal was told that we had accused the youth group of harassing our daughter.

It was all pretty horrific. I had nightmares for a full year and I still have occasional flashbacks. You have to realize that my husband and I were "Mr. and Mrs. Evangelical Super-Doers–we were in that church 5-6 days/evenings a week DOING some kind of service to the church.

I didn’t read the Bible for a full year. As we were running out of that church to our car, I had a vision of “sola Scriptura” as a giant pane of mica-like glass shattering, and I knew at that moment that sola Scriptura was a creation of the devil. Those pastors and the tribunal had twisted the Scriptures to make their accusations of us, and the supposed disregard of authority was meaningless, as none of them had ANY authority given by God (like Catholics priests do).

Those of you who bothered to read the above paragraphs might remember that in many of my other posts on CAF, I am always arguing in favor of respecting the authority of the priests and bishops, and sometimes making enemies on this board and getting in trouble over my comments. Well, now you know my motivation–I respect authority because I’ve seen what happens when authority is blurred and people make their own decisions. One of the main reasons why we came into the Catholic Church was because we saw that the authority structure is straight out of the Bible, while the EFree (autonomous) authority structure is of man, and worldly, and DANGEROUS.

 

[ltwin]

. . . . . Those of you who bothered to read the above paragraphs might remember that in many of my other posts on CAF, I am always arguing in favor of respecting the authority of the priests and bishops, and sometimes making enemies on this board and getting in trouble over my comments. Well, now you know my motivation–I respect authority because I’ve seen what happens when authority is blurred and people make their own decisions. One of the main reasons why we came into the Catholic Church was because we saw that the authority structure is straight out of the Bible, while the EFree (autonomous) authority structure is of man, and worldly, and DANGEROUS.

I have full sympathy with you when it comes to abuse of authority in the church–any church. Been there, done that. Got my T-shirt. School of hard knocks . . . That being said, I think we can all agree that every church–even those with episcopal governance and a belief in Sacred Tradition all have their fair share of abuse and bad governance.

I would hope, as I’d hope with cases that periodically emerge out of the Catholic Church, that things like this in the EFCA are more the exception than the rule. However, that is just my hope, I have no knowledge about any of it. Just pointing out that every system, no matter how carefully regulated, can break down at times.