After the Denominozoic

Abstract

In this paper I argue that sociological denomination theory, despite its success in describing historic denomination cycles, has limits to its contemporary use and does not match the ethnographic description of the variety of ways in which denominationalism is expressed in anthropological ethnographies of Christianity. The cause of this mismatch is placed at the feet of unilinear models of denominational evolution. In its place, a differential model of autopoietic denominational evolution is suggested, where denominations are seen as different and differing solutions to an insistent Christian problematic. The capacities of this model are explored through the Vineyard, an association of charismatic churches that originated in Southern California. When you come to a fork in the road, take it. Yogi Berra The Sociology and Anthropology of the Denominozoic Era It may be an exaggeration to describe the sociological liter-ature on denominationalism as moribund, but perhaps its pallor is not the best. Inaugurated by foundational texts from Weber (1968), Toennies et al. 1973), and Troelstch (1992 [1931]) and filtered through and distributed by Niebuhr (1957), the subsequent literature (along with the " penumbra " literatures on near-correlate sociological problem categories such as church sect, schism, and revival) seems to have done little to advance itself past the original marks set down by those originary figures. This is in part because in the later development of this literature has become (at least to an-thropological eyes) " primarily classificatory and highly scho-lastic " (Robbins 2012b:204), but that is not the only sin. To a large degree the currently dominant " rational choice " var-iants of denomination and church sect theory (e.g., Finke and Stark 2006) are so soaked in metaphors and logics taken from an essentialization of free-market forces that despite attempts to deploy it in other times and locales (Stark 1997), it comes across as so parochially American that it appears to be a good that has no export-market value (see also Handman 2014).