A recent Gallup Poll caught my attention as it correlates well with what I've been noticing in the Church of God: There are considerable differences across various regions of the United States. This is not only true in a general, religious sense, as with this poll, but the result is also reflected in how churches respond to their culture within those regions. Where religion is central to life the church tends to operate with ideological and theological security. Where religion is at the periphery the church cannot assume its place in society and must engage the culture in order to thrive, let alone survive.
As someone who has always lived on the geographic fringes of the continent and the Church of God I can easily see this phenomenon, and frequently see the glazed eyes of those in other parts of the country who cannot imagine anything other than the relative success that the church enjoys there and the methods that are employed.
(CLICK HERE TO SEE LARGER IMAGE)
While not perfect (i.e. factor out the Dakotas and Utah, for example) this map also somewhat reflects prevailing strength and attitudes in certain regions among Church of God people and congregations.
The reality is that despite our common heritage there is considerable diversity across our movement. And, that's not bad. If anything it reflects the magnitude and scope of the Kingdom of God and that despite our differences we are united in Christ.
What does concern me is that we are not always willing to recognize these differences, or create structures or programs to take them into account.
What do you think?
As someone who has always lived on the geographic fringes of the continent and the Church of God I can easily see this phenomenon, and frequently see the glazed eyes of those in other parts of the country who cannot imagine anything other than the relative success that the church enjoys there and the methods that are employed.
(CLICK HERE TO SEE LARGER IMAGE)
While not perfect (i.e. factor out the Dakotas and Utah, for example) this map also somewhat reflects prevailing strength and attitudes in certain regions among Church of God people and congregations.
The reality is that despite our common heritage there is considerable diversity across our movement. And, that's not bad. If anything it reflects the magnitude and scope of the Kingdom of God and that despite our differences we are united in Christ.
What does concern me is that we are not always willing to recognize these differences, or create structures or programs to take them into account.
What do you think?
6 comments:
"What does concern me is that we are not always willing to recognize these differences, or create structures or programs to take them into account."
That, I think, is the primary challenge facing many of our churches today. I live in Ohio, which according to the map falls in the "average importance" category. As such, there are still churches that enjoy success with the same structure and way of doing ministry that they have been doing for 50 years. But there are many others (like my congregation, for instance) that are in desperate need of a "ministry renovation/revolution." And if we don't, as a community of believers recognize this and begin actively working towards it, our congregation won't be here in another 50 years. I see a day in the not-so-distant future where small churches all across the country begin to close their doors for good in droves, while bigger churches get bigger and (hopefully) continue to innovate and do ministry well.
I've been living this study for the past 2 years.
I interned at a large Church of God in Phoenix, AZ that hired a new pastor halfway through my internship. This pastor was from a more religious state in the south. He is a faithful man of God who brought his preaching style and church model to a very different culture and stuck with it. Unfortunately for him and the congregation it just didn't work and he left within a year.
Now, I'm the pastor in the reverse situation. I recently moved from Phoenix to pastor my first church in northern Alabama and I learned quickly that "Big City" wasn't going to bring his model down here either.
I'm learning a lot and it's been a wonderful adventure. While I'm still processing everything, I have realized that pastors and churches need to remember that it's about the message and reaching the lost, not about our personal preferences or a church model that makes us feel safe and comfortable.
I'm still at the beginning stages of my ministry but I hope to learn more about the people and community that I serve and then provide avenues (new and old) for people to come to Christ and to grow in Christ.
Pray for us...all of us. We are ONE Church, serving ONE God but by God's grace we are all different and unique.
"What does concern me is that we are not always willing to recognize these differences, or create structures or programs to take them into account."
Lloyd,
What additional "structures or programs" do you think might be most effective, taking these national/regional changes into account? Should these new initiatives come from administrators- national or regional -be trusted to the local church or some of both?
As a pastor, I still believe in God's purposes to reach out through the local church... fully realizing that the part each local fellowship plays in the kingdom may not be fully realized in it's own time. Hard today to visit some of the most famous churches of all time: church of God at Corinth, Ephesus... you get the picture...
thanks for posting again. yours is one of the few blogs I check on daily. decided to leave a comment mostly just to say thanks for sticking with your blog- even if it is just every month or so. I maintain a few blogs, there are links to a couple of them at www.forchanginglives.com and I haven't posted to the "busiest" one in months. Maybe your time of "silence" will attract more readers!
blessings,
Eric
ps
love what Larry had to say
Stephen,
I think the scenario of large churches growing at the expense of small churches is already happening.
Eric,
I don't think we need any "additional" structures or programs, or that this needs to come primarily from a centralized authority. What we need are creative and effective ways to network together what we already have (i.e. primarily in local congregations), diversity and all!
LLoyd here is a short clip from an article I ran across about a year ago.While I agree that diversity certainly exists in America I think that diversity is happening in even greater numbers between countries and their attitudes about religion and the impact that it plays upon everyday life.
Importance of religion to Canadians:
The Pew Research Center has conducted a series of studies called "The Pew Global Attitudes Project." They is measuring the "impact of globalization, modernization, rapid technological and cultural change and the Sept. 11 terrorist events on the values and attitudes of more than 38,000 people in 44 countries..." A poll released on 2002-DEC-19 revealed whether people around the world consider religion to be personally important. 1
Results from the 41 countries sampled showed that the percentage of the public who consider religion important ranged from 97% in Senegal to 11% in both France and the Czech Republic . They found that the percentage was:
59% in the United States
57% in Mexico
33% in Great Britain
30% in Canada.
What does concern me is that we are not always willing to recognize these differences, or create structures or programs to take them into account.
Lloyd, I belive there will always be those pushing the edges and those slow to make change. We need to continue working at the newer forms of connecting, but I am inclined to believe the personal meetings will renew as time goes on. There is a certain truth in hat goes around comes around.
Post a Comment