Definition of 'mainstream' church needed

I have followed the series Are We Growing? (Page 1, February, March, April) with much interest, as that has been a concern of mine for some time. I’m a fairly new reader and a member of a congregation that would apparently fit into your non-institutional grouping. (Must we still label each other?) I was interested to see that most, if not all, of the interviews were with non-mainstream church members. Can you define a mainstream church for me? I am truly confused and would like to know what makes a congregation “mainstream” for your census.


More responses to Are We Growing? series

Is it a “crisis in identity” when a new generation of Christians is asking questions and wanting to confirm that what we’re doing is truly the answer of God? (See “Churches face identity crisis,” Page 1, March.) This in itself is actually a good thing.

And that we come up with some different answers is also understandable. Much is written about the necessity for us to accept one another regarding differences in faith and practice (Romans 14-15; 1Corinthians 8-10).


It seems to be a fact that most rural churches are not growing. (See “Is there a rural-urban divide in the church?” Page 1, April.) That’s certainly true in this and surrounding counties in central Texas. But this appears to be true in urban areas also. Mergers of two small churches to form a larger one is not growth. True growth comes from baptizing people into Christ and maturing them in the faith.


Responses to multi-site church merger

To affirm in you front-page article that two congregations ... will become “the first multi-site Church of Christ” is an error. (See “One church, two locations,” Page 1, April.) I have contended ... that the church in the city in the New Testament was always spoken of in the singular. “Churches” is a term that referred to large geographic areas, such as Galatia or Judea — never to a city. Our church buildings have contributed much to isolating assemblies (congregations) from one another, but in the beginning it was not so. They had no corporately owned assembly places because the Roman government would not allow it until the time of Constantine. 

To function as one church will certainly destroy congregational autonomy in the city. But at the same time, we must not forget that, in the Bible, church leadership in Christ’s body is limited geographically to the city.


Where exactly in the article was there an equal discussion from someone opposed to the idea of multi-site churches? The story was written as a celebration piece, typical of when a small-town newspaper reprints something from a politician’s campaign ... and runs it as news. The Chronicle has become, like it or not, the most public means of promoting doctrinal “progressivism.”


New reader expresses thanksI received my first copy and read it from cover to cover. It is the best Church of Christ literature I’ve read. Keep up the good work.