Since my last post not long after the North American Convention I’ve had some time to reflect on where we are as a movement. This is a time of reflection for many of us especially as we face big questions concerning our future, most notably the selection of a new General Director.
As I’ve mentioned before we are a very diverse movement. Sadly, however, we have been unable to fully accept and work with this diversity. The result is an increasing trend toward polarizations and divisions. The more l look at this the more I see us in North America separating into three groupings.
1. Heritagers. There has always been among us a strong contingent of those who understand their Church of God identity through our history. This remains true even over 130 years since our beginning. Certainly, our heritage has shaped us and is worth remembering and celebrating. The danger, however, is that this can lead to looking backwards and focusing on what God has done versus where he is leading us. Sadly I see some who seem to more concerned about preservation than seeing their part in God’s mission today and tomorrow.
2. Networkers. In recent years we have seen the emergence of a growing network of individuals who recognize the primacy of our missional calling as a church. The focus of this group is not on our heritage or institutional concerns; instead on mobilizing the church for the future and connect outside of our formal structures. This can be frustrating for those who want more conformity to our identity. Typically this group recognizes our history and distinctives but is not fixated on past expressions of our heritage. Their goal is to forge a new identity relevant for our time but still consistent with our theology.
3. Evangelicals. In my assessment this grouping probably describes the majority of people in our churches, and possibly our pastors as well. As our distinctiveness has diminished over the decades more and more of our congregations have found themselves assimilating into the larger American Evangelical culture, even though there are significant differences between us and them. Much to the chagrin of the Heritage group in particular the Evangelicals are least inclined to stay connected and honor our distinctives. They enjoy the autonomy that our loose polity provides and see the value of our national and regional organizations primarily in terms of what benefits they can receive.
Our future is dependent on how we work despite these three broad divisions. It will also be critical for our new General Director to understand this and cast a new vision that will bring us closer together and not further apart.
How do you see this working itself out among us?
As I’ve mentioned before we are a very diverse movement. Sadly, however, we have been unable to fully accept and work with this diversity. The result is an increasing trend toward polarizations and divisions. The more l look at this the more I see us in North America separating into three groupings.
1. Heritagers. There has always been among us a strong contingent of those who understand their Church of God identity through our history. This remains true even over 130 years since our beginning. Certainly, our heritage has shaped us and is worth remembering and celebrating. The danger, however, is that this can lead to looking backwards and focusing on what God has done versus where he is leading us. Sadly I see some who seem to more concerned about preservation than seeing their part in God’s mission today and tomorrow.
2. Networkers. In recent years we have seen the emergence of a growing network of individuals who recognize the primacy of our missional calling as a church. The focus of this group is not on our heritage or institutional concerns; instead on mobilizing the church for the future and connect outside of our formal structures. This can be frustrating for those who want more conformity to our identity. Typically this group recognizes our history and distinctives but is not fixated on past expressions of our heritage. Their goal is to forge a new identity relevant for our time but still consistent with our theology.
3. Evangelicals. In my assessment this grouping probably describes the majority of people in our churches, and possibly our pastors as well. As our distinctiveness has diminished over the decades more and more of our congregations have found themselves assimilating into the larger American Evangelical culture, even though there are significant differences between us and them. Much to the chagrin of the Heritage group in particular the Evangelicals are least inclined to stay connected and honor our distinctives. They enjoy the autonomy that our loose polity provides and see the value of our national and regional organizations primarily in terms of what benefits they can receive.
Our future is dependent on how we work despite these three broad divisions. It will also be critical for our new General Director to understand this and cast a new vision that will bring us closer together and not further apart.
How do you see this working itself out among us?
1 comment:
I appreciate this analysis, Lloyd. I might not have cast the variations among us in these three categories if I were going to do it myself, but I think you're certainly on to something.
It seems to me that there may be a difference in awareness among these three groups. Heritagers may value Church of God (and congregational) history but may not realize that they are looking only backwards. Networkers may be the most self-aware of the three groups. But Evangelicals, in my opinion and observation, tend to be the least self-aware. That is, they populate (and pastor) Church of God congregations and are glad to do so, but they may not even realize that the messages they proclaim (along evangelical lines) are not in continuity with the broader message of the Church of God. (A couple of recent NAC sermons come to mind.)
I consider myself a networker, and naturally I think others should be networkers too. I wonder - for people in any of these categories, would they naturally wish that everyone think like them? That will make the task of unification and cooperative vision that much more difficult. It will take some strong leadership from the General Director's office to move us forward.
--David
Post a Comment