This post is part of a weekly series based on Patrick Nachtigall's new book, Mosaic: A Journey Across the Church of God. You are invited to read the book along with me and contribute to the discussion in the comments.
Chapter 1 of Mosaic is the true introduction to the book as Nachtigall sets the stage for his journey. He begins at a family cemetery in South Dakota and ponders whether or not this setting is indicative of the future of the Church of God. In doing so he begins to identify some of the challenges we face, and suggests "that we will not be able to move forward in unity until we have a better grasp of the variety within the Church of God and meet the faces behind the various positions, divisions, and communities." (6) Our challenges are not unique as they can be seen in a number of Christian denominations. But, the Church of God does have its own culture and theology that has contributed to some of the problems we face. To illustrate this Nachtigall provides a brief, but helpful, review of the beginnings of our movement.
The real issue we face is the diminishing of "our sense of unique identity" (19). We used to have a strong identity but its steady erosion has left us in a "precarious position" (21). The social and religious landscape has changed around us and the question is whether or not we can respond to these shifts in order to be a viable and strong movement within God's larger church. Nachtigall's journey recorded in the rest of the book will demonstrate if this is at all possible.
The real insights will begin to appear in the subsequent chapters, but Nachtigall does a great job of identifying the core issues in this first one. I see two particular themes emerging which he certainly presents but not overtly: internal diversity and external cultural shifts. These seem to be the greatest challenges that we face. We are no longer a homogeneous people, and therefore it is increasingly difficult to corral such an expansive movement that is no longer contained within a limited geography and demographic as was the case 100+ years ago. This is the result of the growth of the Church of God, but also reflects the changes in the world around us. These external shifts have influenced us and sadly we have not responded well to them. I look forward to seeing how the book unfolds, and the examples he shares that will provide us hope and models for the future.
What do you think of this chapter's description of the issues?
As you read this are you feeling hopeful or discouraged?
Chapter 1 of Mosaic is the true introduction to the book as Nachtigall sets the stage for his journey. He begins at a family cemetery in South Dakota and ponders whether or not this setting is indicative of the future of the Church of God. In doing so he begins to identify some of the challenges we face, and suggests "that we will not be able to move forward in unity until we have a better grasp of the variety within the Church of God and meet the faces behind the various positions, divisions, and communities." (6) Our challenges are not unique as they can be seen in a number of Christian denominations. But, the Church of God does have its own culture and theology that has contributed to some of the problems we face. To illustrate this Nachtigall provides a brief, but helpful, review of the beginnings of our movement.
The real issue we face is the diminishing of "our sense of unique identity" (19). We used to have a strong identity but its steady erosion has left us in a "precarious position" (21). The social and religious landscape has changed around us and the question is whether or not we can respond to these shifts in order to be a viable and strong movement within God's larger church. Nachtigall's journey recorded in the rest of the book will demonstrate if this is at all possible.
The real insights will begin to appear in the subsequent chapters, but Nachtigall does a great job of identifying the core issues in this first one. I see two particular themes emerging which he certainly presents but not overtly: internal diversity and external cultural shifts. These seem to be the greatest challenges that we face. We are no longer a homogeneous people, and therefore it is increasingly difficult to corral such an expansive movement that is no longer contained within a limited geography and demographic as was the case 100+ years ago. This is the result of the growth of the Church of God, but also reflects the changes in the world around us. These external shifts have influenced us and sadly we have not responded well to them. I look forward to seeing how the book unfolds, and the examples he shares that will provide us hope and models for the future.
What do you think of this chapter's description of the issues?
As you read this are you feeling hopeful or discouraged?
4 comments:
Am working my way through MOSAIC. Patrick reveals that we are "diverse," a word traditionalists do not always like. We have always been diverse; we just kept it a family secret.
Patrick calls us a "case study in irony" (18), which I have long experienced. Much of Patrick's thinking will be new to many of our hardliners, but as one struggling to bridge the gap, he reveals much hope for me, from both directions, old and new. Your question, Lloyd, of beginning or the end, as an oldtimer of 50+ years, I conclude that we are understanding our roots better these days and I see a whole new movement toward reformation /renewal/ restoration. I am uncomfortable with some of the adjustments and reconfiguring et al, but I am filled with hope--the very audacity of that lovely word ... :-)
NOTE: While deleting some comment spam I accidently deleted a comment posted by Chuck. Sorry about that! Here's his comment:
Just now entering this conversation...
re: Homogeneous people- one of the things I wonder if Mosaic will address is that we have always been a divers group, but have failed to address it in ways that prepare us for who we are now.
For instance, our efforts at reconciliation with our African American and Latino congregations might have served us as we began to grow more and more divergent within our majority culture congregations and across the national landscape.
I think that in some ways "diversity" has changed... We have always been "diverse" in terms of race; but in the past we were not so diverse in terms of our way of life... There were places where those diverse populations could meet--they had common occupations, etc. Now people of diversity not only have different skin colors but sometimes have vastly different occupations, may even use technologies that someone else cannot dream of having access to, etc. This is true not only among different races but among rich and poor of the same race... We really must learn how to build relationships across all kinds of diversity lines: racial/ethnic, socioeconomic, and (an oft-neglected one) ability/disability. In the past, our society was relation-centered and because many people were familiar with hardship they were eager to extend a hand to those in need... (Most of the Church of God membership in the early days were lower-class individuals whereas now this is not always the case.) The change in socioeconomic status of membership means that primary interest is not outreach or hospitality but prosperity. This is one of the things that harms our movement greatly.
Yes, Sarah, diversity is highly complex and that's what makes it so challenging for us.
Post a Comment