The confusion over ONEvoice!

As most of you know, ONEvoice! is the relatively new, official publication of the Church of God. It is the attempt to resurrect a tool with the rich history of The Gospel Trumpet and its successor, Vital Christianity. For a number of years we lacked such a periodical following the demise of VC, and there were many saints insisting that this is what was keeping our movement from thriving as in the past.

 

ONEvoice! has had over one year (nine issues to be exact) to re-establish itself as our new voice. But, all is not well with the 21st century "Trumpet", and it is probably an excellent indication of the general confusion that exists within our movement in North America.

 

On the surface, the creators and custodians of the magazine need to be commended for devising an innovative approach considering the diversity within the Church of God and the overall lack of interest in almost all periodical publications today. The move to a magazine that shares stories of God's work among individuals and congregations fits our theology well. The writing and layout are medicore, but overall it is attractive and accesible for most people.

 

The real problem with ONEvoice! is not the magazine itself, but our hard-to-please constituency. Despite the cries for a movement publication, the interest in ONEvoice! is dismal. Apparently, there are less than 5000 subscribers, which is far less than what is required for it to be sustainable, and roughly only about 2 subscriptions per congregation. Hardly a strong voice!

 

So, what's the problem? Let me suggest a few reasons for the lack of interest in ONEvoice!:

• Romanticization of the past. Some people believe that the success of The Gospel Trumpet can be replicated today. But, this very vocal group is hardly indicative of the rank and file members within our churches.
• Old medium. The magazine industry is in decline. Sure, there are exceptions, like Oprah's rag, but the fact remains that fewer people read periodicals today. Plus, the cost to produce and mail them is higher than ever.
• Conflicting vision. One of the greatest points of contention over ONEvoice! is it's lack of "doctrinal" content. There is a very vocal minority who want strong doctrinal teaching presented, and will never be content with the "lite" approach taken. The editors, on the other hand, correctly understand the genre of magazine publications and know that broad readership will never be attained through a collection of doctrinal treatises. If there was a strong desire for this type of magazine, the alternative publications like Reformation Witness should be breaking subscription records!

The most recent edition of ONEvoice! (i.e. October/November 2005) has attempted to make some adjustments to satisfy some of the disgruntled. A four page supplement, EXTRAvoice!, is intended to provide more emphasis on doctrine and heritage. And, an audio version is being tested, with the intent of reaching a broader audience.

Sure, I'd love to see ONEvoice! succeed. (I even subscribe). But, I'm not convinced that we should be devoting too much energy in trying to tweak this sucker. Obviously, the large majority of people who are in the Church of God are not prepared to shell out $20.00 a year for six issues of a magazine. The fact is that apart from a major change, ONEvoice! will disappear, leaving some as disillusioned about our identity as ever before.

I'm not sure the demise of ONEvoice! is the end of the world. Maybe this will be the wake-up call we need to see that trying to send everything from the "center" (i.e. Anderson) is not what we need if we are to function as a movement. It's time we start acknowledging the affiliation and communication networks that already exist and build on those. Let's get focused on our mission, and stop worrying about propping  up our "denomination".  Connecting with the core of our calling is what is required to rejuvenate our movement. Once the enthusiasm becomes contagious we will have no trouble getting the word out through the powerful technologies available to us to communicate.

What do you think?