Secret codes: Compiling a guide to deciphering congregational values

[PloverWing]

Back in December 2021, @The Liturgist started a thread on "denominational outliers": congregations that deviated too far from their denominational guidelines, or that took too many risks in their artwork, or that engaged in psychologially damaging practices (Compiling a list of potentially heterodox churches and denominational outliers)

This present thread is inspired by that one, but with a different focus. As I've tried to guide my young-adult children through the task of finding churches where they can grow and thrive, I've realized that congregations often communicate their beliefs and values through codewords in their literature and web sites. An older Christian probably knows what the codewords mean; a younger Christian may not. So, here's my draft of a guide to things to look for. I invite corrections and (especially) additions. I'm also tagging @Paidiske , since she expressed interest in a thread like this.

I'm assuming that the church seeker already knows the major denominational distinctives. Wikipedia will tell you that Presbyterians baptize infants and Baptists do not, for example. I'm trying to focus on items that differ between congregations, as well as things to look for in congregations not affiliated with any denomination.

1. Biblical Inerrancy:

Churches that affirm the inerrancy of the Bible will often have a statement of faith that speaks of the Bible as "infallible" or "inerrant" or "without error". They may describe themselves as "Bible believing".

Churches that do not accept the inerrancy of the Bible usually don't have a "non-inerrancy" statement anywhere, so this is harder to detect.

2. Attitudes toward women in the home:

"Egalitarian" is a common codeword used to describe a view of marriage in which men and women are equal partners, with no hierarchy. Unfortunately, churches that hold this view don't often state it in their literature; perhaps they take it for granted.

"Complementarian" is a common codeword used to describe a hierarchical view of marriage, in which husbands are the leaders and wives submit to their husband's leadership. Look for a statement of faith that uses words like "head" or "leader" to describe husbands, and that uses words like "submission" to describe wives. Some churches may link to the Danvers Statement on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (see cbmw.org).

3. Attitudes toward women in church leadership:

Churches that affirm women in leadership roles don't often state this explicitly in their literature. However, some clues are found in the church's actual leadership: Are any of the pastors/priests female? Are any of the lay leaders (elders, vestry members, etc.) female?

Churches that restrict women from holding leadership positions may not state this explicitly, but look at the language in the statement of faith. If pastors, elders, vestry members, etc., are describes as "men" rather than "people", then women are probably prohibited from holding these positions. Some churches may link to the Danvers Statement on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (see cbmw.org).

Note: Some churches allow women to teach male children but not male adults. These churches may have a female "youth minister" or "minister to children". Be careful about titles like this; they are not as affirming as they look.

4. Attitudes toward LGBTQ Christians:

Churches that welcome LGBTQ Christians, including those in same-sex marriages, at all levels of ministry will sometimes say this explicitly on their web site. Other indicators include: Pride flags displayed at the church or on the web site. Married gay clergy among the staff. In the UCC, the label "open and affirming".

Churches that prohibit same-sex marriage, or that forbid same-sex attraction altogether, often have language in their statement of faith about marriage being between a man and a woman. Sometimes, the statement of faith will explicitly list homosexuality as a form of immorality (e.g., the Baptist Faith and Message). Some churches may link to the Nashville statement (see cbmw.org).

5. Ethnic diversity:

Mercifully, it's been a long time since I've seen an explicit statement from a church excluding people of a particular racial or ethnic group.

Look at the pictures on the church's web site to get a sense of the racial and ethnic diversity in the congregation.

6. Social and community ministry:

Some churches value physical (not just spiritual) ministry to the community and the wider world. Look in the church's newsletter or calendar for participation in food pantries, soup kitchens, thrift stores, homeless shelters, building houses with Habitat for Humanity, and so forth. Some churches partner with regional or national organizations, while others work independently. The phrase "social justice" in a church's literature generally indicates that this kind of ministry is a priority for the church, though not all churches that do social ministry will use this wording.

7. Hidden denominational affiliation:

Some churches are affiliated with denominations but do not make that obvious in the church's name. That is, the church may have a name like "Main Street Community Church" or "Main Street Fellowship" instead of "Main Street Baptist Church". These churches will sometimes note their denominational affiliation in the fine print at the bottom of one of their web pages, or they may have a "history" section that mentions the denomination that created them.

Note that some congregations are affiliated with multiple denominations, and that some congregations are completely independent, with no denominational affiliation whatsoever.

8. Music

Churches vary in their music styles, even within denominations. Some churches favor guitars and synthesizers, generally providing the congregation with words to songs but no printed music. Some favor hymns, mostly written (roughly) between AD 1500-2000, with organ or piano accompaniment, and with hymnals provided to the congregation. Some use even older styles, such as Gregorian chant. Note that a congregation may use a variety of music styles at different services, or even within a single service.

Indications of music styles can be found in the pictures on the church's web site (what instruments are visible?) and in the service bulletins, if they are posted online (what songs or hymns are listed in the bulletin?)

Phrases such as "worship leader" or "contemporary" generally suggest the guitar-and-synthesizer style of music. The phrase "traditional" often means hymns.

Acknowledgements:

Thanks to seeking.IAM for noting the existence of churches that hide their denominational affiliation.
Thanks to public hermit for suggesting the phrase "Bible believing".
Thanks to DragonFox91 for suggesting the phrase "social justice".
Thanks to The Liturgist for mentioning variations in music.


These are my thoughts so far. I invite additions and corrections. Have I left out any important categories?

 

[seeking.IAM]

My suggestion is to look for multiple confirming indicators. A single indicator may not suffice. As an example, the UMC tagline used for years and still in use is, "Open Hearts, Open Minds, Open Doors." For my money, that is an inaccurate indicator of what has been and is actually going on within my beloved UMC. One might be misled if they stop there without inquiring further.

This also gives me the thought that it might be good for your project to recommend perusal of congregational websites in addition to denominational ones to discern where a congregation may deviate from denominational statements.

A look-see on congregational websites for denominational affiliation may also be advisable. There are an increasing number of denominational affiliated churches that are obscuring their affiliation to make themselves appear as a non-denom. Finding out if there is an affiliation may help one find out some things about them that are otherwise unstated.

 

[public hermit]

1. Biblical Inerrancy:

Churches that affirm the inerrancy of the Bible will often have a statement of faith that speaks of the Bible as "infallible" or "inerrant" or "without error".

Churches that do not accept the inerrancy of the Bible usually don't have a "non-inerrancy" statement anywhere, so this is harder to detect

Usually, if a church states they are "Bible believing" they mean inerrant.

I have also noticed that infallibility sometimes does not mean inerrant but that the scriptures are infallible in terms of faith and practice (without affirming inerrancy). I think this is the RCC's position but could be wrong, i.e. they affirm infallibility but not inerrancy.

 

[DragonFox91]

“Social justice”

Is the church focusing on the Great Commission in outreach, or is the emphasis more on just balancing inequities (not always $ inequities)

 

[The Liturgist]

or that took too many risks in their artwork

I don’t consider having a Byzantine style icon depicting one of the most notorious mass-murderers of Christians or featuring a Shinto shrine (referred to as such in their own rubrics) “risky”, I view it as celebrating religions other than Christianity at the expense of Christianity. At least two of the churches on my list have been classified by a bishop who is a friend of mine as apostate, and at least one of them is under an anathema, issued by the pastor from the pulpit of a traditional Protestant church, so there is that (at the risk of sounding like a much loved character from Breaking Bad, yo).

Now regarding your proposed criteria for denominational evaluations, you failed to include any category relating to worship styles. I mean, is this a liturgical church? What kind of liturgy? Do they have organ-accompanied hymns, or ancient chant? Do they have incense? Academic hoods or traditional vestments?

Also you omitted a category concerning iconography and a category concerning veneration of the saints. For some people that’s a no-go, for others, they are fine either way and for still others, its a sine qua non.

Also church discipline is a major area you omitted. Some churches engage in abusive, cult-like practices euphemistically referred to as “church discipline”, and there is an entire meta-denomination called 9Marks of churches which do this (9Marks also posted an article which defended Islamic hatred of Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox on the basis that they are “sexually promiscuous, pornography-viewing, image-worshipping drunks”, and that article, which is outrageously offensive and also probably racist.

And unfortunately 9Marks exists in several different denominations, denominations which I actually like, aside from their churches which are 9Marks-influenced, for example, the Presbyterian Church in America and the Southern Baptist Convention.

Now, the nasty thing about 9Marks is that if you join a 9Marks church and then are put under “church discipline” for any reason (and any reason is usually enough to trigger this; the blog Wartburg Watch has run many articles detailing the abuse they engage in), and then leave that church, you will not be able to join any other 9Marks church, regardless of the apparent denomination the church belongs to. 9Marks claims not to be a denomination, but I think it actually is, and churches which are a part of it are in some cases more a part of it than they are a part of their nominal, publically declared denomination. For example, all 9Marks churches follow strict Reformed theology, and are iconoclastic, whereas the SBC has many Arminian churches as well as churches with spectacularly beautiful stained glass windows. In other words, the statement of faith for 9Marks is more exclusive than that of the SBC.

 

[The Liturgist]

“Social justice”

Is the church focusing on the Great Commission in outreach, or is the emphasis more on just balancing inequities (not always $ inequities)

This is a valid approach.

However, even with the most liberal denomination, the United Church of Christ, we run into the problem that some of their parishes actually aren’t liberal at all; there is a whole group called Faithful and Welcoming dedicated to traditionalist UCC parishes.

This is even more the case in the Episcopal Church, where a very large number of Episcopalian parishes, particularly those with older priests, or priests who underwent formation at Nashotah House (which is a traditional seminary that is much loved, and which used to teach English-speaking Eastern Orthodox seminarians from one of the major seminaries, St. Tikhon’s, I think, a portion of the Orthodox MDiv curriculum) are basically just run-of-the-mill Anglican parishes, with worship comparable to what you would find in the ACNA or the Church of England.

 

[PloverWing]

Thanks, everyone, for the suggestions. I'll be updating the list in my OP soon to incorporate several of them.

A couple of clarifying questions:

Now regarding your proposed criteria for denominational evaluations, you failed to include any category relating to worship styles. I mean, is this a liturgical church? What kind of liturgy? Do they have organ-accompanied hymns, or ancient chant? Do they have incense? Academic hoods or traditional vestments?

Hmm. I was assuming that worship style could be predicted by denomination and hence didn't need to be on the list. But I agree that there can be variations within denominations. If we go with something like Methodist, where there can be a lot of variation: What would you look for on a church's web site to predict the style of music or the formality of the liturgy?

Similarly, I think veneration of saints is pretty well predicted by the denominational label.

However:

Also church discipline is a major area you omitted.

This is a good observation. I've had friends who stumbled into abusive churches. I've been spared that experience, however, so I don't know from personal experience what to watch out for. Can you name some warning signs to look for? It can't be as simple as looking for the word "9Marks" on their web site, can it? I'm pretty sure there are abusive churches that aren't part of that network.

 

[The Liturgist]

What would you look for on a church's web site to predict the style of music or the formality of the liturgy?

Well, its always a bad sign for me if their website boasts of having a “worship team” or if a picture of the nave or equivalent space in their church features a drum kit. Earlier today I was delighted to find a Lutheran parish near where I live belonging to one of the smaller Lutheran denominations in the US, only to have my enthusiasm crushed when, on perusing their website to look for information on their style of worship, I came across a page describing their “Worship Team.” Having a “Worship Leader” instead of a Choir Director, Organist or Cantor is likewise a bad sign, for me at least, because as should be evident I am seriously allergic to contemporary worship.*

Conversely, if the website depicts a choir and an organ, that’s a good sign. Likewise if the church has a capella music, which is the case with all Eastern Orthodox churches except for some Greek Orthodox churches (and I happen to like the more recent Greek Orthodox compositions that use the organ); the music of the Oriental Orthodox churches is likewise almost completely traditional (there had been encroachment of praise and worship music into some churches in the extra-diocesan areas which only had General Bishops, who lacked the authority to force changes on parishes, and thus these parishes were directly under the Pope of Alexandria, who had bigger fish to fry; fortunately Pope Tawadros II saw the problem and created several new dioceses, and in the case of the massive parish of Muqattam, which was being run like a non-denominational megachurch, and which I mentioned in my other thread as an example of a parish successfully restored to denominational standards, he appointed His Grace Bishop Abanoub, who aside from being named after one of my favorite saints, is also a lovable fiery defender of Coptic Orthodox tradition.

Unfortunately some churches in the Syriac Orthodox tradition abuse a 1920s Patriarchal decree allowing the use of organs, and use it to justify the use of keyboard synthesizers, with predictably bad results, and the same occurs in some parishes of the Assyrian Church of the East; fortunately, the traditional a capella music is becoming more common in those denominations.

One can also rest assured of high musical quality in a few other denominations and parish types where a distinctive musical idiom is part of the culture. For example, parishes offering the Traditional Latin Mass will, at those services, offer Gregorian chant, possibly with the addition of appropriate music by Byrd, Palestrina, et al (I have even heard “Christ our Lord Has Risen Today” by John Wesley played as the recessional hymn at a Missa Cantata, but it was thoroughly appropriate, and in general, these services are guaranteed to conform to the musical guidance provided in the motu proprio Tra le sollecitudini issued by Pope Pius X). Likewise, the Covenanting Presbyterians (in the US, the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America; these churches can be identified by a blue flag or banner with the words “For Christ’s Crown and Covenant” one will hear really good A Capella exclusive Psalmody, and I have one of their Psalters in my liturgical library, and have been using it for congregational singing of Psalms (I really find responsorial reading of the Psalms to be a bit depressing, considering there are so many beautiful ways to sing or chant them).

There are also some Baptist churches that do A Capella Exclusive Psalmody with Lining Out, and in the Southern US, you can find some Baptist churches which still use the 19th century Southern Harmony hymnal and Square Note Singing, which is remarkable to hear.

*Indeed, because of the “blended” nature of the music at the Episcopalian parish where my friend was the Vicar, I always attended the 8 AM Said Service. These are an extremely useful fallback in the case of Anglican churches (whether Episcopal, ACNA or Continuing); if there is an Anglican church near you that has a Said Service, you can rest assured of a formal and dignified liturgy, even if it is devoid of music. Unfortunately, these services, which tend to have an older demographic than other services, were widely curtailed during the pandemic, but fortunately, they seem to be returning to the schedule.

 

[PloverWing]

I've revised the OP to reflect comments from @seeking.IAM , @public hermit , @DragonFox91 , and @The Liturgist .

 

[DragonFox91]

Thanks, everyone, for the suggestions. I'll be updating the list in my OP soon to incorporate several of them.

A couple of clarifying questions:



Hmm. I was assuming that worship style could be predicted by denomination and hence didn't need to be on the list. But I agree that there can be variations within denominations. If we go with something like Methodist, where there can be a lot of variation: What would you look for on a church's web site to predict the style of music or the formality of the liturgy?

Similarly, I think veneration of saints is pretty well predicted by the denominational label.

However:



This is a good observation. I've had friends who stumbled into abusive churches. I've been spared that experience, however, so I don't know from personal experience what to watch out for. Can you name some warning signs to look for? It can't be as simple as looking for the word "9Marks" on their web site, can it? I'm pretty sure there are abusive churches that aren't part of that network.

Accountability could be one.

For the first bolded, liturgical in general could be one. I can't some chucrhes using that word, I think non-denominational would stay away from it, for example. You can also look to the dress-code of the leaders. Do they have robes? Do they have a choir (that could go under music)? Is the choir robed?

I feel like youth & children involvement could be another category. But not sure of 'trigger words'.

 

[bbbbbbb]

This thread brought back many curious memories for myself. There is an immense number of code terms I have encountered which are actually antithetical to the actual meaning. These are primarily limited to my personal engagement in primarily Plymouth Brethren congregations, but might also be found elsewhere. Here is a list of some of my favorite codes:

1. "Wine". Frequently the "fruit of the vine" used in communion is not wine at all, but is grape juice and, in very rare instances, something else. However, it is referred to as being wine.

2. "Cup". At the eucharist the "cup" is blessed when, in actual fact, there is no one cup, but trays of tiny glass (or even plastic) cups.

3. "Assembly". John Darby literally translated the New Testament word εκκλησία as
assembly rather than the common translation of "church" in order to avoid conflation of a building with the body of Christ, His assembly or congregation. The Brethren meet in halls and chapels, but never in auditoria (although many of them are architecturally auditoria). This is a carryover from centuries of English persecution of non- Church of England congregations, including Jews and Catholics who were legally forbidden to call their buildings churches. Now, today the Brethren have transposed chapel into a synonym for assembly and speak of the beliefs and thoughts of their chapel(s) and I know of one congregation which refers to its fellowship hall as the "assembly" (not the assembly room).

4. "Fellowship". Many churches formally disdain church membership and technically embrace all who come through their doors as fellow Christians. However, that results in a very tricky situation regarding church discipline. Thus, those who are members are said to be "in fellowship" and those who are not "in fellowship" are shunned. Rather than maintaining a membership roll per se, there is a telephone list of those Christians considered to be "in fellowship".

5. "Circle". In order to distance themselves from "traditional churches" some churches have replaced pews with movable seating and an altar with a communion table (shades of the Reformation here). When observing the Lord's Supper (aka communion, the eucharist, etc.) the chairs are arranged around the table, usually in a square or a rectangle. This configuration is referred to as the "circle" and one is "in fellowship" if one is seated in "the circle". Children, unanticipated visitors, and other potential unbelievers and heretics are permitted to observe the service, being seated outside of "the circle", usually with seats around the perimeter of the room with a wide aisle between them and "the circle".

6. "Denomination". It seems today that the trend is to disdain any form of denominational identification (already touched upon in this thread). The reality, of course, is that, living in the fallen world as we do, Christians can be identified as being affiliated with various schools of theology and practice. It is hardly helpful to anyone concerned to attempt to disguise and disown one's theology, but that is the tendency which ranges from the denominations such as the RCC and many others who wishfully want to think that they are the One and Only True Church of the Great I AM to large numbers of contemporary non-denominational churches who wishfully want to blend into the great sea of the invisible Church. This trend is growing, sadly. Just recently four local Presbyterian Churches merged together and the outcome now is Grace Church (a rather meaningless title).

 

[Paidiske]

In Anglican churches, at least, I'd be looking for churchmanship and social outlook codes; evangelical/catholic, conservative/progressive being the two main axes.

Some of that you might get from pictures; how many candles, how much in the way of vestments, etc; but the language a congregation uses to describe itself can tell you a lot too.

 

[bbbbbbb]

In Anglican churches, at least, I'd be looking for churchmanship and social outlook codes; evangelical/catholic, conservative/progressive being the two main axes.

Some of that you might get from pictures; how many candles, how much in the way of vestments, etc; but the language a congregation uses to describe itself can tell you a lot too.

Of course there are the historic code words of High versus Low and, later, versus Broad.

 

[Paidiske]

Yes, but they don't seem to be the sorts of words most used today.

 

[The Liturgist]

Yes, but they don't seem to be the sorts of words most used today.

Indeed, particularly considering that people interpret them differently. For example, a Prayer Book Society type parish where the priest wears a cassock and surplice and the preferred Sunday service might involve choral Morning Prayer and a said Eucharist: some would say this is low church, but compared to Holy Trinity Brompton, it would be spectacularly high church (the scenario I gave is also rare, but some examples do still exist in Greater London, and also in Virginia, interestingly and randomly enough).