The statement that I have “left the Church of Christ” might surprise those who have known me over the years. However, for those familiar with my writings on institutionalized religion, it may not come as a shock. This decision to break free from traditions and man-made doctrines followed years of dedicated prayer and scriptural study, particularly focusing on the historical development of the first human religious institution – the Catholic Church.
My wife Betty, my steadfast and loving partner for over four decades, has been an integral part of this journey. She has studied, prayed, and served as a sounding board for my evolving understanding. Her balanced perspective has been invaluable. Today, we are united in the reasons I am about to share for leaving the Church of Christ. When I speak of my reasons, I speak for Betty as well.
It is emotionally challenging to declare a departure from something once held dear, especially when it involves cherished friendships and family ties. The Apostle Paul likely experienced similar emotions when he chose to leave Judaism for the liberating embrace of Christ. He expressed his heartfelt desire for the salvation of his Jewish brethren, acknowledging their zeal for God but lamenting their lack of true understanding and their pursuit of self-righteousness instead of God’s righteousness (Romans 10:1-4).
This marks the second profound religious transition in my life. Born and raised Catholic, I underwent infant baptism, catechism, and confirmation at twelve. Betty also completed catechism to marry me. We remained Catholic until I was 24, when we were introduced to the teachings of the Church of Christ. Initial discussions centered on identifying “The One True Church,” a concept familiar from my Catholic upbringing. I was convinced by the Church of Christ’s emphasis on immersion as necessary for the remission of sins, aligning with my understanding of Jesus and the apostles’ teachings. After considerable study, we left the Catholic Church and became members of the Church of Christ.
Four years after our conversion in Wheeling, West Virginia, I left a promising career in country music and enrolled at Florida Christian College (later Florida College) in Temple Terrace, Florida. My aim was to intensely study the Bible and dedicate my life to preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ.
For thirty years, I served various congregations as a preacher. Over time, my scriptural interpretations diverged from what was considered orthodox by some Church of Christ clergy (preachers and elders). We were labeled as “unsound in faith,” and those affiliated with Florida College were cautioned against associating with Dusty Owens. Ironically, I was frequently invited to perform musically at Church of Christ events but never to teach or preach. Financial contributions were welcomed, but spiritual input was not.
This is not intended as a biography, but these details provide context. As I explain my reasons for leaving the Church of Christ, please know that I harbor no animosity towards any individual. Every child of God is my brother or sister in Christ. My critique is directed at the system – a man-made system that, in my view, deprives God’s people of joy, peace, hope, love, and their true spiritual inheritance. Here are the primary reasons Why I Left The Church Of Christ.
The Overemphasis on “Church”
A central tenet of the Church of Christ is the claim of being “the one true church.” This is not merely a descriptive term but a statement of exclusivity. They believe they are the sole church that Jesus will save. This identity is tied to the name “Church of Christ,” and membership within this specific “Church” is often presented as essential for salvation. Furthermore, salvation is often contingent upon being a “faithful member,” defined by regular attendance at all services, generous financial contributions, and adherence to “truth” as interpreted by the preachers and elders. Disagreement with their interpretations can lead to being labeled “in error,” “unfaithful,” and potentially facing censure or even disfellowship.
Through in-depth scriptural study and examination of the New Testament Greek, I began to recognize the flaws in these claims. The fundamental error lies in the very premise – the assumption of a divinely established “church” as understood by the Church of Christ.
The concept of “church” as a structured institution, in my understanding, is a human construct, not a divine one. Over centuries, this human creation has become institutionalized, transforming “church” into an “it,” separate from the collective body of believers. This notion is deeply ingrained in Church of Christ theology.
The English word “church” is a problematic translation of the Greek word “ecclesia.” “Ecclesia” in the New Testament almost always refers to God’s people, those “called out of darkness.” In this context, the ecclesia is the spiritual body of Christ. However, this spiritual concept has been distorted into a literal, organized, functional entity – “the church.” This entity is further subdivided into “local” and “universal” churches. Church of Christ doctrine posits divine instructions within scripture for the “local church,” which they insist must be rigidly followed to avoid divine condemnation. Participation in the “five acts of worship” during church assemblies and sufficient financial giving are deemed essential for salvation and the continued existence of the Church of Christ.
However, this entire theological framework collapses under a simple truth: God never established a literal, functional organization called “the church.” Jesus did not die to save “the church”; He died for individuals. John 3:16 clearly states, “whosoever believeth on Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” Salvation is for individuals who believe, not for an institution. In the apostolic era, conversion to Christianity signified salvation and a direct relationship with God through Jesus Christ. The concept of “church membership” as a prerequisite for salvation is a human imposition that obscures this direct relationship. This realization was a crucial step in my departure from the Church of Christ.
Dusty and Betty Owens in their younger years, reflecting their early dedication to their faith.
Church of Christ as a Denomination
Despite vehement denials, the Church of Christ functions as a denomination. While acknowledging that early Christians were called Christians, saints, and firstborn ones, the Church of Christ rigidly adheres to the designation “Church of Christ.” They argue that other designations are scriptural but in practice exclusively use “Church of Christ.” This name is prominently displayed on buildings, advertisements, and letterheads, serving to distinguish them from other Christian groups like the Church of God, Baptists, Presbyterians, Methodists, and Catholics. This insistence on a unique name, while denying denominational status, struck me as inconsistent and hypocritical.
Webster’s Dictionary defines a denomination as having a specified name, being a class or kind with a specific name, and a religious sect. By these definitions, the Church of Christ undeniably fits the criteria of a denomination. Simply claiming not to be one does not alter the reality.
Furthermore, the Church of Christ exhibits all characteristics of other Christian denominations: a corporate structure, formal organization, membership rolls, dedicated church buildings, clergy (though they may not use that term), and structured worship services. It is challenging to identify any defining feature of a denomination that is absent in the Church of Christ. In essence, the Church of Christ is a denomination in practice, if not in name.
Moreover, the Church of Christ often operates as a sect. Sects are characterized by narrow-mindedness and bigotry. Unfortunately, some within the Church of Christ exhibit these traits, believing salvation is exclusive to their particular brand of Church of Christ-ism. Ironically, within the broader Church of Christ movement, there are numerous distinct sects that often do not fellowship with each other. Interactions between different Church of Christ congregations can be strained, with some groups even requiring rebaptism for members transferring from another Church of Christ congregation. This fragmentation and exclusivity further solidified my view of the Church of Christ as a denomination, and often, a sect.
Authoritative Elders and Preachers
The doctrine of authoritative elders was another significant factor in my decision to leave. Over the years, I witnessed elders, elected for leadership, become consumed by a sense of “divine authority.” They are often presented as divinely appointed rulers, “ruling in the place of Christ.” Preachers often contribute to this by using Hebrews 13:17 (“Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit to them”) to foster unconditional obedience to the eldership. However, a careful study of this verse in its original context reveals that it is not a mandate for blind obedience to delegated authority but an encouragement to value the counsel of older, wiser shepherds. Peter’s admonition to elders to “tend the flock of God… not as being lords over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock” (1 Peter 5:2-3) further clarifies the intended role of elders as servants and examples, not authoritarian rulers.
Jesus himself explicitly rejected the notion of authority over God’s people, even for the apostles. Matthew 20:25-26 states, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. It shall not be so among you.” If divine authority was withheld from the apostles, it is unlikely to have been delegated to elders.
The desire for power can be a corrupting influence. Some elders seek to control every aspect of congregational life and individual behavior, dictating attendance, dress codes, and even personal choices. Conversely, some elders are ill-equipped for leadership, functioning merely as finance committees.
Similarly, in many congregations, preachers wield undue influence, effectively becoming one-man rulers. Congregations often rely heavily on preachers, expecting them to perform all ministerial duties. While outwardly rejecting a clergy system, the Church of Christ often creates a de facto clergy through the elevated role and expectations placed on preachers. This inconsistency and the potential for abuse of power contributed to my disillusionment.
The Church of Christ professes the autonomy of each local congregation. However, this autonomy is often compromised. External pressure from other congregations or influential figures within the Church of Christ can be exerted to enforce conformity, particularly regarding doctrinal matters or perceived threats to orthodoxy. This pressure can undermine local autonomy and stifle dissenting voices, revealing a tension between the ideal of congregational independence and the reality of a more interconnected and sometimes controlling brotherhood.
Strife and Division
The pervasive spirit of division within the Church of Christ was another significant reason for my departure. This divisive spirit, in my view, is contrary to the spirit of Christ and detrimental to the Christian community. Jesus prayed for unity among his followers, and division undermines this divine intention.
The Apostle Paul addressed the issue of division in the early church at Corinth, urging them to speak the same thing and avoid divisions (1 Corinthians 1:10). He attributed their strife and jealousy to carnality (1 Corinthians 3:3), emphasizing that such behaviors are worldly and unspiritual, ultimately sinful.
Paul lists “strife” and “division” alongside serious sins like fornication, idolatry, and envy in Galatians 5:19-21, warning that “they who practice such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.” Promoting strife and division is a grave offense in God’s eyes. My attempts to address this issue within the Church of Christ met with resistance and further turmoil, leading me to conclude that I could no longer be complicit in or tolerate the divisive environment.
Much of the division stems from a perceived duty to “defend the truth” and a misinterpretation of 2 John 9-11. While defending truth is important, Peter instructs us to do so with gentleness and respect, giving a reasoned answer for our hope (1 Peter 3:15). However, in the Church of Christ, “defending the truth” often morphs into defending specific Church of Christ doctrines and interpretations, creating rigid boundaries and fostering conflict.
This emphasis on defending “church doctrine” rather than the core tenets of Christianity inevitably leads to disagreements and disputes. When differing opinions arise, debates can become contentious, fueled by carnality rather than Christian love, resulting in strife and division. The history of the Church of Christ, particularly in areas like Tampa Bay, is marked by splits and divisions over doctrinal interpretations and practices, often leaving fractured congregations in their wake.
The misinterpretation of 2 John 9-11 further exacerbates this divisive tendency. This passage warns against receiving those who do not abide in “the doctrine of Christ.” However, this is often broadly applied to encompass all teachings interpreted as “truth” by Church of Christ leaders. This interpretation allows for the creation of rigid standards and the exclusion of those who deviate from these standards.
For example, Hebrews 10:25, urging Christians not to forsake assembling together, is often elevated to a test of fellowship. Disagreement on the how or why of assembly can be labeled as a rejection of “the doctrine of Christ,” leading to division and exclusion. 2 John 9-11, in its proper context, addresses the specific doctrine of Christ’s deity and incarnation, warning against those who deny that Jesus Christ came in the flesh (2 John 7). It is not intended to be a blanket justification for division over every point of doctrinal interpretation. The misuse of this passage to enforce conformity and create division has been a source of significant concern for me. As I recognized these misinterpretations and their harmful consequences, my disillusionment with the Church of Christ deepened.
Ceremony and Ritualism
Observing the historical development of Catholicism reveals a gradual accretion of ceremony and ritualism. As a former Catholic, I recall the structured rituals of Mass, with a priest as the central figure performing a set liturgy each week. This formalized “worship” often became the focus, with the priest’s personality and performance influencing congregational attendance.
Over time, I recognized similar patterns of ceremony and ritualism developing within the Church of Christ. Perhaps initially obscured by my own ministerial responsibilities, the structured format of Sunday services became increasingly apparent. The predictable sequence of announcements, songs, prayers, Lord’s Supper, collection, sermon, and closing, repeated week after week, mirrored the liturgical patterns I had observed in Catholicism. This ritualistic format, while providing structure, can also become a substitute for genuine spiritual engagement.
The physical space of church buildings contributes to this ritualistic atmosphere. Auditoriums arranged in theater-style seating, often with a spotlight focused on the preacher, reinforce a performance-oriented dynamic. This seating arrangement discourages interaction and fosters a passive, audience-like experience rather than active participation and fellowship. The emphasis shifts from “participating” and “serving” to “attending a service.”
In contrast, the early church met in homes, in smaller, more intimate settings. Jesus promised his presence even where two or three gathered (Matthew 18:20). These house gatherings fostered genuine fellowship, mutual encouragement, and spontaneous expressions of worship. There was no need for elaborate rituals or formalized structures. The shift towards dedicated church buildings and formalized worship emerged later, around the fourth century.
House churches offered numerous advantages: reduced financial burdens, no property disputes, no need for denominational names or elaborate treasuries. Early Christians were encouraged to store resources at home for acts of benevolence (1 Corinthians 16:1-3). Even contemporary debates about women’s roles in church assemblies are often mitigated in the context of house churches, where women’s participation is more natural and accepted. The formality and ritualism that developed within the Church of Christ, often tied to the institutional church building model, became another point of departure for me.
The interior of a typical Church of Christ meeting hall, illustrating the traditional seating arrangement and focus on the pulpit.
Freedom In Christ
God intended for his children to experience freedom in Christ. Jesus declared, “You will know the truth, and the truth will set you free” (John 8:32). This freedom is accessed through understanding and living by His word (John 8:31). Paul emphasized, “For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery” (Galatians 5:1). Christian freedom is not license but liberation from legalistic bondage, expressed through loving service to one another (Galatians 5:13).
Religion, in its legalistic and rule-bound forms, can often enslave rather than liberate. God offers relationship, not religion. Christ did not die to establish a religion, nor did the apostles. The New Testament speaks of the Jewish religion and pagan religions, but not a “religion of Christ.” The Jewish religion, with its Mosaic Law and traditions, and pagan religions, with their temple systems and priesthoods, held people in bondage. Conversion to Christ offered liberation from these systems.
Paul expressed dismay that Galatian Christians were abandoning the grace of Christ to return to “weak and worthless elementary principles… to be enslaved to them again” (Galatians 1:6; 4:9). They were allowing religious leaders to impose rules and regulations as conditions for salvation, such as circumcision, Sabbath observance, and sacrifices. Paul warned that submitting to these requirements would negate the benefits of Christ’s sacrifice (Galatians 5:2).
Denominations, including the Church of Christ, are human institutions prone to creating man-made laws and regulations. These rules, often unscriptural, can lead to spiritual bondage, with members facing censure or exclusion for non-compliance. The Church of Christ, despite its emphasis on biblical authority, has developed a set of unwritten and sometimes explicitly stated rules that can restrict freedom and joy in Christ.
Examples of these man-made rules include: mandatory attendance at multiple weekly services, specific protocols for Lord’s Supper observance, restrictions on musical instruments in worship, mandated financial giving, limitations on who can lead prayers, dress codes for service participants, prohibitions on women teaching or speaking in adult assemblies, and restrictions on social activities like swimming, gambling, alcohol consumption, and Sabbath activities.
These rules, while often presented as biblically based or promoting order, can create a burdensome and joyless Christian experience. Many Church of Christ members struggle with unhappiness and frustration, their Christian lives lacking the promised joy and freedom. Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount outlines the path to blessedness (happiness), a path found in relationship with Him, not in adherence to man-made rules. Paul encourages constant rejoicing (1 Thessalonians 5:16), a difficult command to obey under the weight of legalistic bondage and the constant fear of failing to meet humanly imposed standards for salvation. The answer, I realized, is not “church” as an institution but freedom in Christ Jesus.
Conclusion
These are some of the primary reasons for my departure from the Church of Christ. There are other contributing factors, but these highlight the core issues that led to my decision. I understand that this article may be challenging or upsetting for some readers. My intention is not to antagonize but to share my journey and insights in the hope that it may help others recognize the potential for bondage within man-made religious systems. My prayer is that readers will find the courage to seek God’s will and discover the peace, love, and joy that Jesus offers.
My criticisms of the Church of Christ are, to a degree, applicable to any institutional church. The inherent dangers of institutionalization include the temptation to complicate and embellish simple truths, the pursuit of power and recognition, and the potential for ego-driven conflict. I witnessed these dynamics throughout my years in the Church of Christ.
In the early years of my involvement, I was impressed by the Church of Christ’s emphasis on truth-seeking, open-mindedness, humility, and love. However, over time, I observed a shift towards paranoia, fear, frustration, and suspicion. Open and honest Bible discussions became less frequent, replaced by a more rigid and catechism-like approach to teaching. Challenging questions were discouraged or suppressed to avoid conflict. A defensive posture developed, focused on protecting “church doctrine” at all costs. Members became hesitant to express dissenting views, fearing social ostracization. This atmosphere of silence and conformity became increasingly stifling.
These are, in my view, the fruits of institutionalized religion. The emphasis on professional preachers and authoritative elders has contributed to a passive and unengaged membership. The simple, direct relationship with God offered through Jesus has been obscured by the human construct of “The Church of Christ,” which, in some ways, has become an idol. Is there hope for those within this system? Yes, but it requires repentance and a willingness to change.
The answer, echoing Jesus’ words to the rich young ruler, is to “give it all away and come, follow me.” Lay down the denominational banner of “Church of Christ,” recognizing its divisive nature, and embrace the simple identity of “Christian.” Reject idolatry in all its forms.
“What agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple of the living God. As God has said: ‘I will dwell in them and walk among them. I will be their God, and they shall be my people.’ Therefore ‘Come out from among them and be separate, says the Lord.'” (2 Corinthians 6:16-17).
