I find it curious that the Disciples were eventually categorized as Mainline. I feel like you would have to literally just use a "Mainline = theologically liberal" definition (which I find problematic) to categorize them that way. I know their church theology has changed a lot over the years, but I have a hard time counting a "Restorationist" group as "Mainline Protestant" on principle, haha.
I feel like traditional Protestantism (which "Mainline" originally attempted to describe) largely rejects the restorationist idea that "true Christianity" was lost for centuries and centuries and only these new Nineteenth Century preachers can properly show us how to worship.
Looking at the etymology, the best definition of the "Main Line" are the denominations common to the tony streetcar suburbs of the Gilded Age: the churches of the Industrial Era professional class that had social/political clout and "Old Money" panache. The Disciples certainly fit this description. Go to the downtowns of most large- or medium-sized cities on the East Coast or the Midwest and you will find an old Disciples congregation dating to the latter-half of the 19th century (or nowadays more likely just the building, but more on that later.)
Of course, there is some geographic variety: the Disciples and their more conservative brethren, the Churches of Christ, are most common in a "belt" stretching from OH/IN/IL across the Upper South and into the Lower Plains of KS, OK and TX. These "Christians" were the
leading church body in many counties across the region back in 2000.
As someone else posted, the definition of "Main Line = traditional Protestantism" is pretty awkward for groups like the Methodists but it also over-emphasizes descent from or connection to established European churches. This seems inappropriate for a concept as uniquely American as the "Main Line." But I also don't see the rationale in placing Restorationism outside "traditional Protestantism." Reformed theologians like Bucer and Bullinger stressed primitive forms of church governance and Christian practice from the very beginning (i.e., the basis of Restorationism.)
The American Restoration Movement in which the Disciples originate had concurrent emphases on primitivism and ecumenism. Two independent movements, one led by Barton Stone and the other by a father-son duo of Presbyterian ministers Thomas and Alexander Campbell, were united around these ideas in 1832. There was an eventual split between the congregations stressing primitivism (the "Churches of Christ") and those focusing on Christian freedom and ecumenism (the "Christian Churches.") Some of these Christian Churches later adopt a denominational structure and move in a decidedly progressive direction, formally establishing the Disciples of Christ in 1968.
And, of course, another major factor tying the Disciples to the rest of the Main Line is its decline. It has lost almost 50% of its members since 2000 (690k to 350k), which is the steepest decline for any of the "Seven Sisters" during that time period. The Christian Church I attended in Athens, GA (est. 1876) lost so many members and was in such financial trouble that it sold off its stained glass. It's a pretty open question at this point if the Disciples can even survive as an independent denomination moving forward. They've been in full communion with the UCC since 1989, so an eventual merger seems like a distinct possibility.
Poll
