Why do some Protestants refuse to tell what their denominations are?

[PetraG]

Being Protestant logically endows one with the right to be a theological denomination of one. Why would a Protestant feel any need to self-identify with any authority other than themselves?

This is very common among the “spiritual but not religious,” too. I don’t see why this would be a particular surprise. Their theology does not rest on tradition or Apostolic authority. Why would they have been taught they need a denomination? They only need someone to pray with, not someone to explain what is and is not true. They have the authority to do that themselves.

 

[Wannano]

Being Protestant logically endows one with the right to be a theological denomination of one. Why would a Protestant feel any need to self-identify with any authority other than themselves?

This is very common among the “spiritual but not religious,” too. I don’t see why this would be a particular surprise. Their theology does not rest on tradition or Apostolic authority. Why would they have been taught they need a denomination? They only need someone to pray with, not someone to explain what is and is not true. They have the authority to do that themselves.

Actually I might have sounded like this in my earlier reply but this was not what I meant. I do not see it this way nor do I beleive very many do.

 

[PetraG]

The Protestants I actually know who decline to identify with a particular denomination just don’t have one that teaches just what they believe. They don’t have some particular reason they need to; they are their own religious authorities.

This is very common generally in Western Oregon. People don’t apologize for it or see a problem with it.

Sadly, I’d go so far as to say the attitude is not uncommon among Catholics here, either. I don’t mean that as an accusation but as a report of what they say themselves. (Maybe that is regional?)

 

[FollowChrist34]

How far is this from conscience allowing communion for the divorced/remarried. Over and above the sin of adultery I mean. Granted, this is just one sin that individual conscience overrides, not absolutely everything. At least that is the idea anyway.

 

[lanman87]

There are certain doctrines that almost every group who calls themselves “Christian” agree upon. There have also been doctrines that have been debated from the very beginning. As theologians started asked questions the answers to those questions different opinions emerged on how to answer those questions. Debates began to spring up as different theologians answered those questions in different ways.

Ultimately, each of us must come to our own conclusions about those "debatable’ doctrines. Or we may just refuse to take sides in the debate. While understanding that our trusting in and living for Christ is more important that squabbling about theological questions and answers that will not truly be settled until the Lord’s return.

Interestingly, here in the USA at least, a sort of unwritten consensus has emerged among the majority of Evangelical denominations as to what is the essentials beliefs and what are secondary “debatable” beliefs. This is why you see a large degree of cooperation in ministry and evangelism among denominations, particularly at the local level. We recognize each other to be part of the universal church because of our shared beliefs.

 

[anon65111186]

Just a simple question: why?

I’ve encountered that as well, and I’ve wondered the same thing. I’ve asked Protestants about it and heard things like “I don’t like categories” even though to me non-denominational is itself a category, isn’t it?

If I say non-denominational, I mean that is an actual thing with certain characteristics, which distinguish from a non non-denominational believer, church etc, right?

A person can be a non-denominational, but still be a Protestant.

A Catholic can’t be a non-Catholic and a Catholic though.

Kinda funny.

 

[lanman87]

Being Protestant logically endows one with the right to be a theological denomination of one. Why would a Protestant feel any need to self-identify with any authority other than themselves?

I would say this is partially true. We live in an age of choice. We each have the ability to examine the different teachings about Religion and accept or reject whatever teachings we agree with. In that sense, we are a denomination of one, we are responsible for our own faith and how we live that faith. Faith is a matter of the heart. Our religion, hopefully, is an expressions of that faith.

Even being a Catholic is a matter of a personal faith.

 

[Emma2829]

Denominationalism is a fairly recent (and a particularly American) concept. At the time of the Reformation, the various Protestant bodies could be classified into 2 distinct groups: churches, which were essentially national or territorial (i.e. the Anglican Church in England, the Reformed Church in the Netherlands, etc.) and sects (i.e. Anabaptists, Quakers, Mennonites). Both Protestant churches and sects essentially claimed to have a monopoly on religious truth, making religious pluralism impossible.

American religious identity has always been extremely fragmented. In order to forge a cohesive national identity, American Protestants downplayed their religious differences, instead embracing the idea of “Denominationalism”- which basically says that what church you go to is purely a matter of personal preference.

The theological and practical implications of this attitude are obviously problematic. I think modern Protestants have started to realize this dilemma. As a result, many of them profess to be “non-denominational”- which is basically just another way of saying Baptist.

 

[anon65111186]

many of them profess to be “non-denominational”- which is basically just another way of saying Baptist.

Interesting, how is it Baptist exactly? Are the doctrines similar?

 

[lanman87]

As a result, many of them profess to be “non-denominational”- which is basically just another way of saying Baptist.

I find your response interesting. As someone who was raised Baptist I’ve often found “non-denominational” to be another way of saying Pentecostal. Almost all of the non-denoms in my area are Pentecostal/Charismatic. I’ve been to a few and this has been the case almost every time.

 

[lanman87]

Denominationalism is a fairly recent (and a particularly American) concept.

I agree with this. I’ve often been scorned for saying that Luther and Calvin weren’t the principal causes of the number of denominations. It was the Constitution of the United States of America. At the time of the writing of the Constitution there were maybe 15-20 protestant denominations. Lutheran, Reformed/Presbyterian, Baptist, Quakers, Anabaptist, Anglican, Puritans, Congregationalist and the beginnings of Methodist. I’m sure there are others but those are all I can come up with off the top of my head.

When the churches came out of government control the churches started to split based on cultural and regional differences. The civil war played a huge part in the number of denominations as many of the large denominations split into north/south denominations and then in the early 20th century the Pentecostal movement caused more denominations to flare up.

Lack of church/state relationship and freedom to split/start new churches for any reason whatsoever is what caused the explosion of denominations.

 

[Emma2829]

Unlike Episcopalians, Lutherans, Methodists, Presbyterians, etc., there is no “Baptist Church.” There is zero hierarchy- every individual Baptist church is totally autonomous. Some Baptists churches might be members of a specific conference (i.e. the Southern Baptist Conference), but this is totally optional. Therefore it is difficult to say what exactly constitutes Baptist doctrine. For example, some Baptists are Calvinists and others are Arminians.

Some shared features of typical non-Denominational churches and Baptist churches include: believer’s baptism, altar calls, aversion to liturgy and ritual, spontaneous prayer, simple worship, emphasis on the Bible as the sole source of authority, purely symbolic interpretation of the eucharist, the importance of having a personal conversion experience- being “born again” etc.

 

[BoomerangToo]

The only people I have encountered who adamantly refuse to disclose their church affiliation is the Jehovah’s Witnesses. I think they’d rather receive a hundred blood transfusions then go out and vote before they’ll fess up on what church they go to.

 

[JonNC]

Just a simple question: why?

They came to you, tell you that your belief is wrong and theirs is right. They will tell you how the Bible should be interpreted. When you ask which church they come from, they would not tell. Why is that? Are they coming with bad intention or insecure or unsure or maybe ashamed of their church?

It is a question I’ve often asked. One of the strengths (there were many) of the old format was that information was on screen.
With the new format, and when people do not share their communion membership, it makes dialogue difficult

 

[JonNC]

I believe it’s insecurity. Many denominations are divided in and within themselves. I will talk to one Lutheran called confessional LCMS and they will believe something different than the ELCA which is more liberal.

This alone I think would lead to some type of proof that Sola Scriptura leads to division even within certain denominations.

Most Lutherans have listed their affiliation, in my experience here, at least on the old format

 

[lanman87]

Another reason is that people may have preconceived ideas about the church based on the “title” of the church. It goes both way. I’ve found some folks on this board have preconceived ideas about some things and have wrong understandings of evangelical teachings. On the other hand, I freely admit that I had misunderstandings about RCC doctrine and terminology before I came to this board.

Sometimes people will not say “I’m a Baptist” because it could bring a certain preacher or group (Westboro Baptist maybe) that are totally different and do not share the same core values and teachings. Instead of theological discussion it could turn into “Why do Baptist think God hates homosexuals”. Which is not what 99.9% of Baptist churches teach.

 

[signit]

Perhaps they simply wish to emphasis that they see themselves as essentially Christian, rather than from a splintered set of different denominations?

I’ve noticed that members of one of the churches in my town call themselves “Christian” first, then, if you ask if you go to Brand X Church, will say, “Well, I have attended services at that church . . . .”

It seems that what they’re saying is that they’re “saved” Christians first (according to their beliefs), i.e., that the main thing is that they’re “saved” Christians and where they go for Christian fellowship is second to that.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

To me as a Catholic, I don’t really care what denomination a Protestant is. I only became aware that the Protestants had significant differences between their Protestant churches when I was in my early 20s and started meeting some Protestants for pretty much the first time. I grew up in a very Catholic area, and as an adult I actually met Jewish people, Muslims, Hindus and even a Sikh before I met a significant number of practicing Protestants. I probably met some non-practicing Protestants who had a general belief in God/ Jesus, but they didn’t attend church or seem to have much of a religious identity compared to the Catholics and Jewish people marching off to services and the Sikh going around in his turban.

I became aware of the differences between Protestants only as a side effect of the Protestants themselves being very aware and discussing them. For example, if I compared my husband’s Presbyterian family to the Anglicans (to me there was no difference because both sects came from UK and didn’t like us Catholics in the past), I would get this huge lecture on how Presbyterians are nothing like Anglicans, and Anglicans are “practically Catholics” (to which I strenuously objected since my grandfather would not even step foot in the National Cathedral of USA because he considered it “Anglican”). Even now we get discussions like the person on Calvinism thread wanting to explain to me how some Protestant sects that come from churches originally founded by Calvin aren’t “Calvinist” anymore. I guess if I were a student of religion, I might care, but honestly I don’t care about the 5000 little splinter groups Protestants have formed or what they believe, and I get the sense many Protestants don’t care either. They are like the people who are “spiritual but not religious” except that they find some church to go to services in, sometimes not even every week. Whatever.

 

[Lea101]

For most Protestants in my country, they don’t even know what denomination they are under (ie non denominational). They just say the word ‘Christian’ over and over again with a blank face!

 

[JetteZ]

With the new format, and when people do not share their communion membership, it makes dialogue difficult

Why would it make any difference? You are talking to a person not a group of people of similar belief structure who may or may not believe exactly the same thing. Just one person.

Even among Catholics, we have different interpretations and different preferences within worship.