Varieties of World-Wide Denominations

Today's post is by UM & Global blogmaster Dr. David W. Scott, Director of Mission Theology at the General Board of Global Ministries. The opinions and analysis expressed here are Dr. Scott's own and do not reflect in any way the official position of Global Ministries.

 The recent turmoil in The United Methodist Church has re-ignited conversation about the church’s global nature and whether it might be possible to structure the church globally in some other way.

Looking ecumenically shows us there are many different ways of organizing a church that is to some extent “global,” “world-wide,” or “international.” I do not distinguish between the three terms in this piece. What follows is a rough typology of these different ways of being a world-wide church, from most centralized to less centralized.

1. Centralized world churches

• Church members see each other as fellow members of the same church, spiritually and organizationally.
• Decisions affecting all aspects of church life, including doctrine, practice, personnel, and program are made by a centralized individual or small group, though those decisions may be implemented at subsidiary levels, and subsidiary levels may have additional decision-making authority.
• Polity structures are the same for all regions, regardless of proximity to the centralized decision-makers or historical homeland, with perhaps some variation in areas of new church development.
• Examples: The Roman Catholic Church, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons), Jehovah’s Witnesses

2. Democratic world churches

• Church members see each other as fellow members of the same church, spiritually and organizationally.
• Decisions affecting all aspects of church life, including doctrine, practice, personnel, and program are made democratically by a body including equal or proportional representation from all areas, though those decisions may be implemented at subsidiary levels, and subsidiary levels may have additional decision-making authority.
• Polity structures are the same for all regions, regardless of proximity to the centralized decision-makers or historical homeland, with perhaps some variation in areas of new church development. Some areas may be privileged because of membership size or financial resources, but not because of variations in polity.
• Examples: The Church of the Nazarene, the Seventh-day Adventist Church, the African Methodist Episcopal Church, the Church of God (Cleveland, Tennessee)

3. Centralized nationally-based churches with global reach

• Church members see each other as fellow members of the same church, spiritually and organizationally.
• Decisions affecting all aspects of church life, including doctrine, practice, personnel, and program are made by a centralized individual or small group, though those decisions may be implemented at subsidiary levels, and subsidiary levels may have additional decision-making authority.
• Polity structures are different in the church’s historic homeland than they are elsewhere in the world. These differences tend to reinforce the power and centrality of the church in the homeland.
• Examples: Universal Church of the Kingdom of God, the Apostolic Church – Ghana, Jesus is Lord Church Worldwide

4.    Democratic nationally-based churches with a global reach

• Church members see each other as fellow members of the same church, spiritually and organizationally.
• Decisions affecting all aspects of church life, including doctrine, practice, personnel, and program are made democratically by a body including equal or proportional representation from all areas, though those decisions may be implemented at subsidiary levels, and subsidiary levels may have additional decision-making authority.
• Polity structures are different in the church’s historic homeland than they are elsewhere in the world. These differences tend to reinforce the power and centrality of the church in the homeland.
• Examples: The United Methodist Church, International Church of the Foursquare Gospel, Church of God in Christ

5.    World-wide theological communions

• Church members see each other as fellow members of the same tradition, but may or may not think of themselves as members of the same organization.
• Decisions about central church doctrines are made by a group of representatives from regional units including equal or proportional representation from all areas. A central body may also help foster cooperation in ministry among regional units, but it has no decision-making authority over personnel and programs in those regional units.
• National or regional units function as autonomous churches, making their own decisions about personnel, program, practices, and internal structures.
• Examples: the Anglican Communion, the Free Methodist Church, the Wesleyan Church, the Moravian Church

6.    World-wide cooperative fellowships of national churches

• Church members see each other as fellow members of the same tradition, but do not think of themselves as members of the same organization.
• A central body helps foster cooperation in ministry among regional units, but it has no decision-making authority over theology, practices, personnel and programs in those regional units.
• National or regional units are autonomous churches, making their own decisions about theology, personnel, program, practices, and internal structures.
• Examples: the Lutheran World Federation; the World Communion of Reformed Churches; Alliance World Fellowship (Christian and Missionary Alliance); World Assemblies of God Fellowship

7.    World-wide cooperative fellowships of local churches

• Church members see each other as fellow members of the same tradition, but do not think of themselves as members of the same organization.
• A central body helps foster cooperation in ministry among regional units, but it has no decision-making authority over theology, practices, personnel and programs in those regional units.
• Local congregations are autonomous churches, making their own decisions about theology, personnel, program, practices, and internal structures, though congregations also band together into national or regional units for cooperation in ministry.
• Examples: Baptist World Alliance, Mennonite World Conference, Calvary Chapel

It is worth noting two things about the churches described above: 1) The Roman Catholic Church is the largest, most globally distributed, and most cohesive of global churches. 2) The overwhelming majority of world-wide Protestant bodies are Pentecostal or holiness in their theology and background. Arun Jones has written fine pieces on UM & Global about the Catholic and Pentecostal approaches to being a global church.

Finally, a disclaimer: I am not an expert in the polity of all forms of Christianity. It is quite possible that some of the specific examples cited above are mischaracterized. I encourage readers to do their own research into the specific polity arrangements of the churches mentioned.