# Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) Confession of Faith



## Bible Belt Presbyterian (Nov 13, 2012)

I'm not sure exactly where I should put this but after seeing a thread on Billy Graham in here, I thought it to be alright. Moderators may move this thread to part of the forum that is better suited.

I was researching the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), henceforth referred to as CC, because a friend was looking into the Marriage and Family Therapy program at CC's Christian Theological Seminary. From everything that I have read, CC has become fairly liberal and among other things, allows for individual interpretation of scripture and that everyone can basically believe what they want to outside of the fact that Christ was the Son of God, which might explain a vague confession of faith. I was on their website and found this  and I was hoping that those who are more knowledgeable than I might be able to break it down better.

"As members of the Christian Church,
We confess that Jesus is the Christ,
the Son of the living God,
and proclaim him Lord and Savior of the world.
In Christ's name and by his grace
we accept our mission of witness
and service to all people.
We rejoice in God,
maker of heaven and earth,
and in God’s covenant of love
which binds us to God and to one another.
Through baptism into Christ
we enter into newness of life
and are made one with the whole people of God.
In the communion of the Holy Spirit
we are joined together in discipleship
and in obedience to Christ.
At the Table of the Lord
we celebrate with thanksgiving
the saving acts and presence of Christ.
Within the universal church
we receive the gift of ministry
and the light of scripture.
In the bonds of Christian faith
we yield ourselves to God
that we may serve the One
whose kingdom has no end.
Blessing, glory, and honor
be to God forever. Amen."



This is something that they clearly created because it has no resemblance of any of the confessions that I have read (Apostle's, Nicene, and Athanasian Creeds, or the Belgic and Westminster Confessions) in my opinion.

Does "Through baptism into Christ we enter into newness of life and are made one with the whole people of God." to mean they support regenerative baptism? Am I wrong in this? What do you all see in this, if anything. It seems hard to find out what exactly CC believes and the only thing I have seen from searching on here is a three year old thread that is not specific to just them and a seven year old thread when they elected a female leader. Even when looking "The Four Priorities of the Church" they are WAY off in what they should be. It seems to be more about the physical, brick and mortar church rather than the invisible church.

Any assistance in both breaking down their confession and gathering of information about what they believe would be appreciated.


----------



## Rich Koster (Nov 13, 2012)

From their site:
"87. The offices of elder and deacon are ordered by the congregations, through election and recognition with appropriate ceremony, for the performance of certain functions of ministry appropriate to the offices.
a. A person elected elder is authorized to exercise within the congregation which elects her or him the ministerial functions it assigns for periods of time which it specifies, such as sharing in the ministration of baptism and the Lord's Supper and the conduct of worship, and sharing in the pastoral care and spiritual leadership of the congregation. The eldership is a voluntary ministry, each congregation having a plurality of elders.

b. A person elected deacon is authorized to serve in the congregation which elects her or him for periods of time which it specifies by assisting in the ministration of baptism and the Lord's Supper, in the conduct of worship, and in the pastoral care and spiritual leadership of the congregation. The diaconate is a voluntary ministry.
"

Due to this alone, I would calculate that they are on the liberal end of the spectrum. I also notice a lack of scriptural references on many things, including this part about elders/deacons.


----------



## Edward (Nov 13, 2012)

They are Campbellite in origin, generally baptize by immersion, and ecumenical in outlook. They are members of the WCC and NCC. They are tolerant of unorthodox teaching and belief. I'd characterize them as theologically liberal, as that term is generally understood, but perhaps more tolerant of those who do hold orthodox beliefs than you might find in the PCUSA or ECUSA today. As they say of themselves, "The church is identified with the Protestant “mainstream” and is widely involved in social and other concerns. Disciples have vigorously supported world and national programs of education, agricultural assistance, racial reconciliation, care of the developmentally disabled, and aid to victims of war and calamity." 

As for your question about baptismal regeneration, I think that would reflect a level of theological detail with which they would not concern themselves. They are more interested in doing Social Justice these days.


----------



## Dearly Bought (Nov 13, 2012)

Christian Theological Seminary is *not* recommended. As others have mentioned, the Disciples of Christ are the mainline liberal branch of the Stone-Campbellite movement. If your friend is interested in womanist/liberation theology, process theism, the social gospel, and secular psychology, then this is the school for them. You can get a pretty good idea from the syllabi posted here. Orthodox Christians need not apply.


----------



## Bible Belt Presbyterian (Nov 13, 2012)

Thank you all for the information and opinions. This has confirmed my suspicion and I have discouraged them from even thinking about visiting. We recently visited RTS Jackson and while they enjoyed it, they were just looking at other marriage and family therapy options. I had not heard of either the seminary or the denomination so I was not completely sure how far they erred from scriptural theology (aka. reformed theology). A mutual reformed friend and I have hopefully taken this particular option off of her list.


----------



## KMK (Nov 13, 2012)

Edward said:


> As for your question about baptismal regeneration, I think that would reflect a level of theological detail with which they would not concern themselves.



Agreed.


----------



## CuriousNdenver (Nov 14, 2012)

I have a friend who was raised in this denomination. He considers it a cult. His experience was that they did, indeed, believe in baptismal regeneration. 

He tells stories of his fear as a youth of dying before being baptized, hence before he was eligible for salvation.

Perhaps they have moved further left since then, or the individual church he was affiliated with was outside their norm.

I find it somewhat ironic how quickly a group can go from works-based salvation (baptism) to pure liberalism. Either way, salvation in their eyes is a work of man and not of God.


----------



## Edward (Nov 14, 2012)

CuriousNdenver said:


> I have a friend who was raised in this denomination. He considers it a cult. His experience was that they did, indeed, believe in baptismal regeneration.



That sounds more like the Church of Christ branch of the Campbellites, rather than the Disciples of Christ.


----------



## toddpedlar (Nov 14, 2012)

Edward said:


> CuriousNdenver said:
> 
> 
> > I have a friend who was raised in this denomination. He considers it a cult. His experience was that they did, indeed, believe in baptismal regeneration.
> ...



Yes - the problem is of course the name "Church of Christ" is held by several different groups that generally range from the quite liberal to the standard evanjellyfish to the cultic. I think by number most of them are in the middle group, actually - although one could argue that there's not much difference between moralistic therapeutic deism and theological liberalism. The strongest memory I have of folks I knew in Disciples of Christ churches is the time I was told in quite giddy terms by a young lady in the D of C that she most valued the Lord's Supper when it was just her and her friends doing it by themselves down on Manhattan Beach at sunset. When I questioned her as to how frequently they did this and what the elders of the church had said about it, she quite plainly said a) they did it a few times each summer and b) they were encouraged in it by their church leadership as a spiritual strengthening practice.


----------



## KMK (Nov 15, 2012)

toddpedlar said:


> Edward said:
> 
> 
> > CuriousNdenver said:
> ...



This jibes with my own experiences in a DoC Youth Group in OC.


----------



## KMK (Nov 15, 2012)

My Alma Mater, Chapman U, is affiliated with DoC. The chapel at Chapman is called "The All Faiths Chapel". 'Nuff said.


----------



## CuriousNdenver (Nov 17, 2012)

Edward said:


> That sounds more like the Church of Christ branch of the Campbellites, rather than the Disciples of Christ.





toddpedlar said:


> Yes - the problem is of course the name "Church of Christ" is held by several different groups that generally range from the quite liberal to the standard evanjellyfish to the cultic. I think by number most of them are in the middle group, actually - although one could argue that there's not much difference between moralistic therapeutic deism and theological liberalism. The strongest memory I have of folks I knew in Disciples of Christ churches is the time I was told in quite giddy terms by a young lady in the D of C that she most valued the Lord's Supper when it was just her and her friends doing it by themselves down on Manhattan Beach at sunset. When I questioned her as to how frequently they did this and what the elders of the church had said about it, she quite plainly said a) they did it a few times each summer and b) they were encouraged in it by their church leadership as a spiritual strengthening practice.



Can you help me understand the differences in these groups? Is the "Christian" church also associated with these groups? What about the Congregational churches? Someone once told me they were connected to the Church of Christ in some way. ....... or should I start a new thread for this?


----------



## arapahoepark (Nov 17, 2012)

CuriousNdenver said:


> Edward said:
> 
> 
> > That sounds more like the Church of Christ branch of the Campbellites, rather than the Disciples of Christ.
> ...



This might help: Church of Christ - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Edward (Nov 17, 2012)

CuriousNdenver said:


> What about the Congregational churches?


 Many of those are UCC - clearly theologically liberal to the point of being post-Christian. On a scale, it would be UCC - DoC - CofC.


----------



## CuriousNdenver (Nov 18, 2012)

Edward said:


> Many of those are UCC - clearly theologically liberal to the point of being post-Christian. On a scale, it would be UCC - DoC - CofC.



Do these groups share common roots? How do their teachings differ?

My friend who came out of the CofC considers it a cult because of their water baptism requirement for salvation.


----------



## Edward (Nov 18, 2012)

CuriousNdenver said:


> Do these groups share common roots?



Both DofC and CofC are Campbellite in origin. UCC devolved from the congregational puritan churches of New England. Although DoC and CofC have a common origin, DofC is probably much closer to the UCC and PCUSA today than it is to the CofC. 

CofC does have some cultish elements, but, on the other hand, many on this board would agree with them on non-instrumental worship.


----------



## CuriousNdenver (Nov 23, 2012)

Edward said:


> Both DofC and CofC are Campbellite in origin. UCC devolved from the congregational puritan churches of New England. Although DoC and CofC have a common origin, DofC is probably much closer to the UCC and PCUSA today than it is to the CofC.
> 
> CofC does have some cultish elements, but, on the other hand, many on this board would agree with them on non-instrumental worship.



Thank you Edward!


----------

