Anthony Chute begins his introductory essay in Why We Belong—a book exploring evangelical unity and denominational diversity—by recounting a scene from Charles Schulz’s 1966 classic, It’s the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown:
… an interesting exchange takes place as Linus pens his annual letter to the Great Pumpkin. ‘When are you going to stop believing in something that isn’t true?’ inquires Charlie, to which Linus shoots back, “When you stop believing in that fellow with a red suit and white beard who goes ‘Ho, Ho, Ho’!” Charlie Brown looks at the camera and says dryly, “We are obviously separated by denominational differences.”
Linus’s line is whimsical, but it names something substantial. Denominational differences can feel stark. It’s also an intriguing window into Schulz himself, who grew up nominally Lutheran, then joined a Church of God congregation in Minnesota, later attended a United Methodist Church when he moved to California, and eventually distanced himself from the church altogether. In his later years, Schulz quipped, “I guess you might say I’ve come around to secular humanism” (Good Grief: The Story of Charles M. Schulz).
Reading his story, I can’t help but wonder what prompted those shifts. Were they theological? Personal? How did the pastors of these churches counsel him in these moments? Was he pushed away? There could have been many factors. The relationship between personal convictions, the local church, and denominational affiliation is rarely simple.
I write as a convictional Southern Baptist. I hold a master’s degree from one of our denominational seminaries. I also have a professional doctorate from a seminary that champions its evangelical ecumenism and am now pursuing a PhD at a seminary affiliated with the Anglican Church of Australia (Yes, I am still a Baptist). On Sundays, I happily pastor a Baptist church in North Carolina, where some members come from a range of Protestant evangelical traditions.
Some made the transition because their doctrinal convictions changed. Others made the change because they moved to the area and are drawn by shared convictions or relational connections. And occasionally, someone leaves for the same kinds of reasons.
But then there are those who leave—or contemplate leaving—not because of our preaching or our polity but because they are unsettled by our denominational ties. For some, the concerns are tied to deep wounds or painful past experiences because of how our denomination handled specific issues. Then there are those who consider leaving not because of heresy or scandal but because of disillusionment. They’re weary, ired, or simply drawn to another tradition over secondary issues like the meaning and mode of baptism, or tertiary matters like eschatology. These moments call for more than explanations. They call for pastoral presence, clarity, and patience.
Regardless of one’s tradition, it’s not uncommon for church members to raise concerns about denominational affiliation. Maybe they read something on social media. Maybe they saw a headline from a reputable media outlet. Sometimes the reporting is correct, but the concern is shaped by confusion about how denominations actually function. Sometimes the reporting is flawed—driven by misinterpretation or personal grievance. And sometimes, the concern is both well-informed and warranted.
Part of pastoral leadership involves clarifying the identity and purpose of our denominational structures. The word denomination is derived from the Latin denominare, which means “to name.” In other words, denominations name their distinctives. Doing so is good because it clarifies important convictions and provides shape to missional partnerships. Broadly speaking, evangelical denominations have always emerged at the intersection of conviction and cooperation. They help churches locate themselves within a confessional tradition, providing both theological boundaries and practical alignment.
Denominational structures provide systems for accountability and organization. They create space for shared purpose— missions, benevolence, education. In many ways, they formalize the guidelines for the types of collaborative ministry we see in the New Testament (see Acts 15:1–35; 1 Corinthians 16:1; 2 Corinthians 8:1–7, 19). Today’s structures may vary, but their purpose isn’t new.
So when a member is considering leaving because of denominational affiliation, it may be helpful to outline how that affiliation actually works. How does the broader denominational body relate to the local church body? What kind of authority does the denomination exercise? Does the issue at hand even reach the local level? Sometimes, the issue prompting concern has little bearing on the local body. Other times, it does. In either case, the member may need help seeing the connection clearly.
When possible, the disillusioned could be encouraged to stay and serve as agents of change. Like many other associative bodies, denominations often reflect the old adage “You get out what you put in.” Of course, this varies across Protestant denominations. But in general, I’ve found that many people bring faulty expectations to their understanding of denominations. While there is no perfect church or denomination, I still believe denominations serve a good net purpose.
Beyond clarifying how a denomination functions, it’s vital to understand what’s really behind the concern. Before you meet with a church member on such matters, pray for biblical wisdom and the guidance of the Spirit—it’s essential. James reminds us that if we lack wisdom, we should ask God, “who gives generously” (James 1:5). Wisdom is often what’s needed because the relationship between personal convictions, the local church, and denominational affiliation can be a complicated one.
It also takes patient listening and intentional questions. Proverbs 20:5 says, “The purposes of a person’s heart are deep waters, but one who has insight draws them out.” That’s our aim. Behind every concern is something deeper—maybe fear, maybe frustration, maybe a desire for justice, maybe a genuine theological shift. But we won’t know unless we ask pointed questions.
I’ve found it helpful to put the following questions on the table:
- Are you considering leaving because our church or denominational leaders have adopted false doctrine, promoted heretical teachings, or refused to confront those who teach those things?
- Are you considering leaving because immoral, unethical, and unbiblical behavior is either ignored or tolerated among the leaders or members of this church or our denomination?
- Are your concerns based on biblical conviction or communal conflict?
- Are the concerns prompting your consideration of leaving a hasty reaction or a prayerful and informed departure?
- Have you thought through the implications of this decision for your faith, your family, and your future?
These questions can open the door to difficult conversations. And sometimes, the answers are hard to hear. That’s why it’s essential to be aware of your disposition. Every member mutters from time to time, but it stings when someone tells you they’re contemplating leaving the church. It’s difficult not to take it personally—even if their reasons stretch beyond the church to the denomination.
As the conversations unfold, it’s helpful to remember Paul’s words to Timothy: “Correct, rebuke and encourage with great patience and teaching” (2 Tim. 4:2). That kind of shepherding should always walk hand in hand with what Paul says in 1 Thessalonians 5:14, “Warn those who are idle and disruptive, encourage the disheartened, help the weak, be patient with everyone.” That last line is easy to overlook, but it matters—patience is to be given to all.
In light of this, I often ask myself: What concerns can I honor and what convictions should I challenge? That question guides how I respond, whether I’m offering counsel, correction, or caution. In the end, we are called to model gracious, wise, nondefensive shepherding—knowing when to listen, when to push back, and when to let go supportively with care.
And if it’s time to let go, I try to remind them that there’s a right way to leave and a wrong way to leave. Hopefully, they’ll be able to speak graciously about how God used the church in their lives, share their reasons with humility and wisdom, and not torch the bridge behind them on the way out. After all, their brothers and sisters in Christ will still be here. As Paul wrote, we are to “make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace” (Eph. 4:3).
Finally, let me offer one suggestion that may be of preventive aid.
On the front end, having a robust membership process allows the church to outline its confessional convictions and denominational distinctions. Joining or parting ways with a local church should never be an easy decision. That’s why, when we interview new members, we ask specific questions to understand the reasoning behind their desire to join our church, especially if they’re coming from a like-minded church in our area.
We’ve also followed an example from other churches and developed a church covenant that outlines the expectations of our members. In many of these covenants, you’ll find a line similar to this: “If we leave this congregation, we will join another gospel-preaching church as soon as possible, where we can carry out the spirit of this covenant and the principles of God’s Word.” A line like this lets prospective members know up front, “If you leave, we are going to follow up with you because we care for your soul.” In a culture shaped by consumeristic individualism, statements like that matter. They create space for clear expectations and accountability.
All this to say, when it comes to Christians and church membership, I am convinced that being clear about doctrinal and denominational distinctives from the outset is just as important as how you shepherd someone when they are deciding whether or not to leave the local church.
I affirm the Nicene Creed, in that “I believe in one holy, catholic and apostolic Church.” But I am also aware that within Protestantism, we have “one Lord, one faith” and many expressions. I agree with Carl Trueman, who once said on a panel discussion, “Thank God for denominations. That means someone somewhere actually believes something!”
We shouldn’t dissolve our differences. We should make them clear. In some instances, those differences are secondary or tertiary in matters of theology or ministry practice. However, there are other cases—when comparing Protestant traditions with Roman Catholics, the Eastern Orthodox Church, Jehovah’s Witnesses, or Mormons—where there is no commonality in matters of biblical authority, the doctrine of God, and salvation. Potential departures in the former category require care and kindness. Potential departures in the latter require us to offer clarity and strong caution.
In the end, when it comes to my like-minded Protestant brothers and sisters, I return to the prayer of Jesus—that Christians “may be one” in their unity on the primary matters of historic orthodoxy (John 17:21).
Matthew Z. Capps serves as lead pastor of Fairview Baptist Church in Apex, NC and as second vice president of the North Carolina Baptists. He is the author of several books, including Drawn by Beauty and Every Member Matters.
