First of all, the appeal of denominations in Protestantism (and this extends to Catholics and Orthodox) :

Second of all, Independant Protestants, and this is a bit ambiguous.

Third of all there are the non-denominationals, and these are peculiar.

(1) First of all, the appeal of denominations in Protestantism (and this extends to Catholics and Orthodox) :

(2) Second of all, Independant Protestants, and this is a bit ambiguous.

(3) Third of all there are the non-denominationals, and these are peculiar.

Independant Protestants are often not really independant, because independance would mean that there would be no effort towards visible unity, no dependance. For instance the Independant Fundamental Baptist churches, IFB for short, detatched themselves from the Baptist Church because they deemed it necessary to avoid the increasing modernism and liberalism of the Baptist churches. So in separating themselves they wanted to achieve visible unity in conservatism and fundamentalism. Therefore they are not trully independant unless their independance is simply meant as a statement directed towards the Baptist churches, although it is true that the hierarchical structure is less evident.

Second of all there are the non-denominationals, and these are peculiar.

They are trully independant, because they have no dependance to any denomination. They usually prefer being called Christians as opposed to Protestants, even to the point of sometimes hijacking the name Christian for themselves and excluding Catholics and Orthodox which is naive to say the least. The advantages of such an attitude are that one is not enclined to believe in doubtful doctrines for the sake of unity, the rest are but consequences of this one advantage.

In résumé. Denominations are useful for unity, the Independant churches are denominations that try to recapture what has been lost over time with the original denomination, and non-denominationals are truly independant and answer to no one but their conscience and in so doing negate a 100% of the hierarchical visibility.

Second of all, Independant Protestants, and this is a bit ambiguous.

According to wikipedia :

Independent church may refer to:

1. National church, especially in Anglicanism and Orthodox Christianity, the organisation of that denomination within a given nation, which acts independently of the churches of the same denomination in other nations.
2. Free church, as opposed to a state-sanctioned or established church
3. Non-denominational church
4. Independent (religion) as used in the 17th and 18th centuries,
5. a Congregational church (in particular)

Strictly speaking, independance would mean that there would be no effort towards visible unity but rather an exclusive focus set on the veracity of theology to the extent that it is possible without a solid hierarchy, thus no dependance. Today most of the churches that claim the title "independant" are protestant congregations that, in a desire of purification, have separated themselves from their native churches. For instance the Independant Fundamental Baptist churches, IFB for short, detatched themselves from the Baptist Church because they deemed it necessary to avoid the increasing modernism and liberalism of the Baptist churches. So in separating themselves they wanted to achieve visible unity in conservatism and fundamentalism. Therefore they are not trully independant unless their independance is simply meant as a statement directed towards the Baptist churches, although it is true that the hierarchical structure is less significant.

Third of all there are the non-denominationals, and these are peculiar.

They can be said to be trully independant, because they have no dependance to any denomination. They usually prefer being called Christians as opposed to Protestants, even to the point of sometimes hijacking the name Christian for themselves and excluding Catholics and Orthodox which is naive to say the least. It is true that this phenomenon of hijacking the name Christian is recent, but paradoxically it does show that even non-denominational Christians feel a subconscious need for visible unity. The pivotal advantage of non-denominationalism is that one is not enclined to believe in doubtful doctrines for the sake of unity, the rest are but consequences of this one advantage.

Yes the quote comes from a Catholic source, evidently, but facts are facts. The article simply reported on a historical event, not a theological opinion.

In résumé. Denominations are useful for unity, the Independant churches are denominations that try to recapture what has been lost over time with the original denomination, and non-denominationals are truly independant and answer to no one but their conscience and in so doing negate almost 100% of the hierarchical visibility with only the local congregation being structured.

First of all, the appeal of denominations in Protestantism (and this extends to Catholics and Orthodox) :

Second of all there are the non-denominationals, and these are peculiar.

First of all, the appeal of denominations in Protestantism (and this extends to Catholics and Orthodox) :

Second of all there are the non-denominationals, and these are peculiar.