Do we need a Consultation against Church Union?
The Consultation on Church Union, which will hold its sixth annual meeting during the first week of May, has in fact become the Consultation for Church Union. By its very nature, the consultation is preoccupied with the favorable aspects of uniting the ten denominations now participating in the negotiations. Its reports, two booklets, several pamphlets, and other communications deal mainly with the positive side of the issue.
This approach may have been necessary at first, but the time has come for presentation of the opposing view. The need for a dialogue—pro and con—on union is evident from a study of various statements issued by COCU. In the foreword to a booklet containing reports of the first four meetings, the Executive Committee says, “We feel that we cannot now turn back from the road to unity, but must press with all our power to have the millions of our fellow-churchmen know and share this same experience.” The inside cover says the COCU denominations “are seeking organic union.” Such statements reveal the strong conviction within COCU that organic union has already been accepted as the proper goal for all the churches involved.
A change in the mission and purpose of COCU occurred at its 1965 meeting, according to this same booklet: “At Lexington the Consultation passed from the phase of conversation to negotiation.” At the fifth meeting, in Dallas last year, the consultation approved an outline of a time schedule and procedure for the merger called “The Steps and Stages Toward a United Church.” The schedule is summarized as follows:
1. Establishment of the consultation in 1962.
2. Adoption of “Principles of Church Union” at the 1966 Dallas meeting.
3. Preparation of a plan of union, and its adoption by the denominations acting severally.
4. Unification of ministry and membership.
5. Writing and adoption of the constitution of the united church.
If this time schedule represented only a possible procedure, there would be no cause for alarm. However, the schedule was approved at the Dallas meeting and apparently is being implemented by COCU as if it had already been approved by the denominations involved. The “Steps and Stages” statement says that as a result of the Dallas meeting, “we are entering upon the third stage of this journey.” COCU is committed to the formation of a union church. It has become a Consultation for Church Union, moving within an already determined timetable and striving for an already accepted goal.
The COCU idea was originally suggested by Eugene Carson Blake in his historic sermon in San Francisco on December 4, 1960. The intended purpose of the consultation that resulted was to discuss the possibility of organic union among the churches involved, originally The Methodist Church, the Protestant Episcopal Church, the United Church of Christ, and the United Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A. The Christian Churches (Disciples of Christ) and the Evangelical United Brethren Church accepted subsequent invitations, and since then, four other denominations have joined: the African Methodist Episcopal Church, the Presbyterian Church in the U. S. (Southern), the African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church, and the Christian Methodist Episcopal Church.
At the early stage of COCU, only three denominations gave their delegates authority to begin negotiation (United Presbyterian, Christian Churches, and United Church of Christ). Methodist delegates were authorized only to converse about union, not to negotiate or form a program. But soon an attempt will be made to change this. The 1968 Methodist General Conference will undoubtedly be asked to grant official negotiating powers. The Episcopal General Convention will vote this September on whether to authorize the negotiation stage.
Since COCU has become a Consultation for Church Union and has already greatly influenced the upper power structures of Methodism and possibly other denominations, it is time for us to have a Consultation against Church Union to represent the other side. The denominations are either in stage three or on the brink of it. If all the churches involved give official negotiating status to their COCU delegates, a plan of union will be drawn up and then promoted from the top down through the denominations. This will make dissent even more difficult and unpopular than it is now. Before this crucial step is taken, Protestants must consider such questions as these:
1. Will union result in a setback to unity? An aggressive movement to unite the churches from the top down would only create more division. Methodism already has a splinter group, the small Southern Methodist Church, which stayed outside the 1939 north-south merger. More than 100,000 Congregationalists left before the United Church of Christ was formed in 1957. The wrong approach to ecumenism will result in further division—and for valid reasons.
2. Will union achieve the main goal of its proponents? The scandal of Protestant division does hurt the work of the Kingdom to some extent, especially on the mission field. However, most of the overt divisiveness comes from aggressive, sectarian groups that are not involved in the proposal for a united church. The denominations participating in COCU are already sharing in cooperative enterprises. Their union will not necessarily bring more harmony into Protestantism since the sectarian denominations are not involved.
3. Will union repeat the mistakes of the past? We had organic union in western Christendom in 1500. However, theological perversion, ecclesiastical rigidity, and political involvement dominated the Church. This led Martin Luther, John Calvin, and other reformers to attempt to renew the Church through a return to biblical standards. Our American heritage with its religious liberty, evangelical piety, and separation of church and state is one of the obvious fruits of this reformation. In the minds of many, organic union would be a step backward. The scandal of theological differences might be minimized by a united church, but past ethical, social, and political evils would be encouraged to reappear. It is still true that “power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
4. Will union minimize an important benefit of denominationalism? Protestantism in America is now characterized by competition. This has definite benefits, especially in a culture with a Christian majority. In fact, friendly competition in an open society is fundamental to the free-enterprise system. Union will minimize creative competition in Protestantism. If business monopolies, labor monopolies, and government monopolies are bad for our democratic society, then religion monopolies would also be bad, and for much the same reasons.
5. Will union really result in renewal? There is much talk about the renewal of the Church today, and many schemes have been proposed to achieve it. A basic part of the answer to renewal is to be found in Jesus’ idea of pruning the tree to produce fruit. The Church must set higher standards of discipline for itself if it is to be vital and respected in society. Union may bring more regimentation, but it will not bring more discipline. And by its very nature, union will lead to the compromise of doctrinal and ethical standards.
6. Will union lead to a loss of individualism? Individualism is on the wane in our urban, technological society marked by mass communication and mass advertising. Conformity is the order of the day, and persons are losing their identity in our secular age. Church union will tend to destroy individualism in religion. Conformity in doctrine, conformity in worship, conformity in religious education, and conformity in organization will further depersonalize our society.
The Consultation against Church Union should begin its work immediately. The months ahead are critical for Protestants. Now is the time for Protestant clergy and laity to be warned of the dangers of a united church.
