To use the analogy of divorce, one can be bitter, difficult, and hateful with an ex-spouse (from my experience as a pastor, not personally, going on 20 years with my bride)......or one can understand that one cannot live together, but continue to be kind , supportive, and
speak well of each other.
The problem is that the analogy of divorce is not a very accurate comparison. The relationships of a person to a congregation or a congregation to a denomination are very, very different from marriage. Attempting to define the best way to describe an individuals reactions towards a former congregation or to a former denomination by the use of an inaccurate analogy simply reinforces inaccurate understanding of that relationship.
Why not use the analogy that a denomination is an apartment building one chooses to live in. If one of the apartments catches fire, one can continue to pay one's attention to the portions that aren't burning down and ignore the fire, or one can yell "Fire!" to warn everyone else, leave the burning building and seek new shelter, and continue to attempt to convince others in the burning building that they should leave before the fire spreads to their rooms, or at least extinguish the fire. You'll also need to convince those in the apartments that aren't yet burned to ignore those who insist on talking about the apartments and other amenities that aren't on fire while the burning portion of the building keeps spreading.
Or, one could use the analogy that a denomination is like a barrel of apples. When one starts to rot, it gives off a gas that prompts the other apples to rot. One can ignore the portion of the barrel where the rot is spreading, but that's only a short-term denial of reality. Once a barrel of apples starts rotting, the rot spreads. One needs to find a new apple barrel.
Others might contend that the relationship between a congregation and the denomination it is affiliated with is like that of a patient and their doctor. If one discovers that one's doctor is making errors that threaten the health of his patients, then one not only leaves that doctor and finds a new one, one must also warn all the doctor's other patients to leave for the sake of their health and safety. One has an obligation to raise awareness of the doctor's malpractice in order to protect others. Keeping silent about it is not an act of Christian kindness, it is an abdication of Christian responsibility.
Neither of those analogies are perfect, which only proves that "proof via analogy" doesn't really prove anything.
The fact is that the relationship between individuals and/or congregations and the larger church body that they are affiliated with is a unique relationship. A marriage is a peer-to-peer relationship, a merger of a man and a woman (and
only a man and a woman) into a couple pair-bonded for life. The relationship between a person and a congregation or a congregation and a church body is not a peer-to-peer relationship. Marriage relationships don't include provisions for one spouse merging with other spouses. Marriage relationships don't include provisions for one spouse unilaterally changing the rules of the relationship. Marriage relationships aren't based on legalistic sets of rules that give one spouse the power to make profound changes in the relationship with the other spouse have no recourse but to accept it. It is also not a commitment for life. It is closer to a contract relationship that exists only so long as both parties keep their parts of the bargain, but even that is not an exact comparison.
It might be similar to other relationships, but it is not identical. Any advice or recommendations on how to deal with that unique relationship when the church body changes into something quite different from what it originally was needs to address that specific, unique relationship -- not relationships that are so dissimilar that they really cannot be compared.
And a good starting point would be to come to an agreement about just what a denomination is, and what the relationship is between congregations and denominations. During your absence, there were some attempts made to define what a denomination is in
this thread. Very few of the people who squawk the loudest about how people and congregations are supposed to treat a denomination even bothered to post anything in that thread. The one thing that appears to a conclusion from that thread is that there is nothing in Scripture or the Confessions that really addresses what a denomination or "church body" is and what the relationship is between a congregation and denomination is. Some claim that a denomination is "the Church", and argue that leaving one's denomination is tantamount to leaving "the Church", and at the same time will argue that one can hear the Gospel rightly preached and receive the sacraments properly administered at any Christian congregation regardless of denomination or even faith tradition. Go figure!
So, I ask you, how is it that the relationship between a congregation (and the congregation's members) and a church denomination is so similar to the marriage relationship that analogies about marriage are proof of the proper actions regarding a former denomination?
