BOUT The time I was 17, I took a ride with my Mom and a Rabbi. For work, Mom was driving the conserva/dox Rabbi to Newark Airport. Mom was a paralegal and, although I’m not sure, I imagine the Rabbi was a client or witness for a client of the law office where Mom worked. Mom had asked me along because I was a religion geek, even then, and Mom said she thought I and the Rabbi would have a good conversation. In hindsight, I think Mom was also inviting me a long as a chaperon for the Rabbi’s reputation. Not sure, but it seems strange to invite a kid to such a conversation.

Anyway, we made it all the way down the Palisades Parkway and beyond the GWB moving towards the NJ Turnpike (or the Garden State? I always get the comfused) and then – after about two hours in the car – the Rabbi decided to engage me in conversation. And he asked the oddest question of a 17 year old: where did I think Christianity was headed in the coming years? This is 1980 or 81… here’s my answer:

I think the Christian community is splitting up into four sections, divided between liturgical and non-liturgical, on the one hand, and conservative and liberal on the other. I predicted that the Ecumenical Movement was only going to deepen those splits, as like met like and they got along. He asked me about the Roman Church and I hypothesised (without know about it) that the American Church would be dividing between liberals and conservatives, if not officially, then, at least in their function.

Nearly 30 years later, we still have not had a major break in the Roman denomination but, truth be told we can see the four communities I discussed shaping up. Word reaches us today of the possibility of a Personal Prelature for the Traditional Anglican Communion (ie, the Non-Geographical diocese they’ve always wanted) which may only serve as the ultimate bridge across the Tiber for many of the conservative liturgical types. Meanwhile, the Anglicans of the Global South and their Allies in the North, are less liturgical, more evangelical, and find themselves playing around with the radically protestant Reformed Episcopal Church, and the likes of Rick Warren and others on the Evangelical centre/right. Liberal Catholics already play well together, even around the table, although that is usually Sub Rosa. I recall a gathering of gay-friendly clergy from 1985 at the Church of St Luke in the Fields: it was the second time I’d seen liberal RC and Anglicans mix it up around an Altar (the first time was at St Francis Xavier church). These things do happen.

Adding to the mix, the Emergent folks (largely liturgical, but only sorta) are deviding up between the progressive and tradtionalist. And most of the main-line bodies are doing the same thing – even becoming, to a great extent, more liturgical as it happens (look at the way the Methodists and Episcopalians are drifting to communion).

Now, add to this the rest of the perfect storm:

As denominational membership returns to its pre-war (WWII) levels as a precentage of the total population, the realignment of folks in non-traditional structures under my four divisions continues to happen as an emergent property of the various congregations.

The financial crisis makes top-heavy organisations increasingly unsupportable. We are seeing this most clearly in seminary just now, but – as in the 80s and 90s – I’m sure there will be one or two rounds of lay-offs at national offices. I’m waiting for the ELCA and the ECUSA to find a way to merge their national staffs. It would be interesting if that could also include the UMC. My next choice for that party would be the UCC. (I do not predict these mergers to happen in toto: I’m guessing certain parts of each would break away.)

The aging Xers and Millennials (and their children and, soon, grandchildren) are not at all invested in “brand” even when they are involved in one. This trend started with the Boomers. One goes to a Church not because it’s Episcopal and one is Episcopalian, but rather because the parish is big on Social Justice or because the music is good, or the preaching is “supportive” or whatever. Is only furthers America’s innate congregationalism.

Yes: this leaves the ER Orthodox right out of the picture (I imagine the WR Orthodox as having already made their “Conservative/Liturgical” choice) but in this country, at least, in many cases, the Orthodox are also split into these divides with the “Ethnic” folks being in the Liberal Arm and the “Convert” folks being conservative. I could imagine large parts of the the GOA and the OCA hanging out with some of the liturgical liberal folks while the AOA might lead the rest in wanting to stay with the conservative non-liturgical folks (from whence they sprung). I repeat, “I could imagine” but I don’t predict. Even the parts that “I could imagine” are more tied to Orthodoxy as part of their personal identity than many converts give them credit for. If you imagine “being Greek” = a Byzantine liturgy, you’re not going to go “Be English” or even “Italian” just because your politics agree: but you will invite them to your parties more.

What ship does this Perfect Storm wreck under a huge and salty tsunami? Nothing save the petty flotilla of our current denominational bickerings; only to be replaced by different vessels, yes. “I am of Paul, I am of Apollos” has been a problem in the Christian community since the beginning.

But it does point out that the Denominational Structure, at least as we have known it, is increasingly not the safe haven we might have imagined. That might be a good thing, or we might see it as a threat.