Relfections on financial challenges

The announcements of layoffs and budget cutbacks at Church of God Ministries have generated considerable concern in recent discussions in which I have been involved. The news is somewhat unsettling, although not everyone is panicked. Some see this merely as a necessary adjustment that organizations need to regularly go through as they rationalize their activities, especially in a time of economic downturn. I am not convinced it is that simple.

These financial challenges, as Dr. Duncan pointed out in his recent letter, have been developing for quite some time and are reflective of much more profound challenges facing us.

First, I believe this is indicative of the bigger struggle that we continue to have over becoming a "denomination", even though we tend to deny that this remains an issue. C. E. Brown's suggestion that there is a difference between "organizing the church and organizing the work of the church" is true, but we nevertheless remain uncomfortable with intentional structure and organization, even to the point of this attitude being detrimental at times. The debates earlier this year over our hyper-congregationalism illustrates this. Sadly, however, we tend to divide on this issue at the extremes, and fail to see more reasonable solutions that both respect the dynamic nature of the church, and insure cooperation and accountability. The result of all this internal tension is a relatively low level of commitment to national and, in some cases, district organizations.

Second, these struggles with centralized organization are not just limited to the Church of God. There are also some broader trends at play here. The wisdom of centralization is increasingly questioned and dismantled across many sectors of our society, including government, business and religion. Our information age has spawned a new approach for cooperation: non-hierarchical networks. For example, at one time it made perfect sense for centralized, denominational missions organizations as missions endeavors were very complex and costly for individual congregations. But now, churches want to get personally involved in missions, even sending their own missionaries and establishing direct contact with churches and ministries in other lands through regular communication, direct giving, and missions trips. Merely sending money to a national mission organization does not have the appeal it once did. The lesson in all of this could be that an organization like Church of God Ministries may have a greater role in facilitating networks than actually delivering services. As simple as this sounds, it would be a radical change.

Third, the challenges we face can also be attributed to the lack of a coherent, consistent, and compelling vision for our movement. This is not any one particular person's fault (or responsibility), although it does reflect our current lack of and distrust of strong leaders. All of this reflects a steady erosion of purpose since our founding almost 130 years ago. Our movement was based on some very clear ideals, and was later reinforced by a church-historical eschatology. Since that time we have become much more geographically and sociologically diverse; our theological positions have been refined; there has been a great urge to identify with mainstream Evangelicalism; and there are other voices and groups effectively proclaiming aspects of our message. Certainly attempts have been made to cast a new vision for the movement, but none have captured widespread enthusiasm or acceptance.

In light of these reflections I believe that this is a critical time for Church of God Ministries to continue the process of reinventing itself. Or even better, for our movement to define itself and then reinvent Church of God Ministries to serve that purpose. Obviously this is a grand challenge, and not one that can happen in a short amount of time. But, it needs to happen, and we must be committed to it now.

More budget woes

Continuing on the recent layoff announcements at Church of God Ministries, General Director Ronald Duncan recently sent pastors an email with a more detailed financial update and a revised budget for 2009 set 25% lower.

Certainly the financial stresses in Anderson are real. From communications I've had with people at our national offices, the last few weeks have been difficult. In keeping with the broader financial challenges experienced across the country right now, there is considerable anxiety as to whether the near future will bring any more bad news. Duncan revealed some of this concern with comments like:

"The manner in which we collectively view these reductions will affect the future of our movement. Some may view these reductions as failure. I certainly have reflected on this point of view. There is an element of these reductions that certainly feels like failure—failure of our congregational system of polity to support and fund the decisions of the General Assembly, failure of Church of God Ministries to adequately challenge and provide the necessary motivation to inspire support for the budget, failure of our leaders and congregations to deal with the gravity of the situation, and failure on my part to provide the leadership necessary for success. ...

"Throughout the Church of God’s 127 years, finding the financial support for the congregational, state, and national ministries has been a constant challenge. We seem to be dealing with an old, yet unresolved, question: Are we living and teaching principles of stewardship from the New Testament? Our future in both the near-term (one to two years) and our mid-term (three to five years) will be affected by how we respond." [emphases his]

I will offer some of my own thoughts on the future in an upcoming post, but for now let me say that I agree with Duncan that this is a critical moment in the history of our movement, at least from an organizational perspective. The current financial realities and trends indicate that there is not a common consensus across North America as to what our cooperative ministry should look like within our polity, in light of our doctrinal convictions, and in response to the challenges of ministry today.

Ultimately this will be resolved. Either by necessity or design. Hopefully, it will be the latter.

Church of God Ministries reduces staff by 25%

General Ronald Duncan sent out a notice today that in order to cut expenses Church of God Ministries is reducing its workforce by approximately 25%. This is in response to the continued decline of giving to the basic World Ministries Budget.

Obviously these are tough financial times in our world, a fact that makes these cuts prudent. The decline in giving, however, began well before the current global crisis.

There will be many opportunities to sort through all of this, including analysis of why, and how we should respond for the future. For now, however, prayer for the families affected by these layoffs should be our priority.

I noticed that this information is not yet available on the Church of Ministries website, so I will include the text of his email for those of you who did not receive it.

Dear Fellow Servants of the Church,
 
It is with a heavy heart that I share with you that Church of God Ministries has found it necessary to release eight current employees in an effort to reduce our overall expenses to within our projected income. The elimination of their employment, combined with seven other full-time and four part-time positions that have been vacated over the last few months that we have chosen not to fill, represents a reduction in our workforce of approximately 25 percent. This is one of the numerous steps we are taking to ensure compliance with the Ministries Council’s Ends Policy that specifies Church of God Ministries submit a balanced budget with no deficit.

It was especially difficult to let these valued and high quality employees go who have dedicated their work to the service of the church.  Those losing their jobs included a team director, three ministry administrators, a graphic designer, an educational administrator, a church and donor relations consultant, and a part-time ministry assistant. To help them through this difficult time we are offering them a separation package. The terminations are effective November 28, 2008. Please pray for these individuals who have lost their jobs.

During the 2008 General Assembly, I proposed a baseline budget process to better align our budget with actual income. This resulted in a 10 percent reduction of the Basic portion of the 2008 World Ministries Budget. This baseline process guides our efforts towards the development of the 2009 and 2010 budgets. Regrettably, giving to the Basic Budget has continued to decline.
 
A detailed financial analysis this month of our income streams, expectations, and anticipated expenditures has led us to a difficult place. Our Leadership and Management Teams have worked diligently to cut expenses, find efficiencies, and increase revenue. In early December, I will share with you the 2009 and 2010 budgets and enumerate the additional reductions related to ministries (either reduced or deleted) we find necessary to realign our budget.
 
Our vision and mission remain the same-to transform culture by being the body of Christ. Please continue to pray for the church and our efforts here at Church of God Ministries as we coordinate the collective ministry of the Church of God at the national level. The Lord is good and greatly to be praised-even in these difficult times.
 
Grace and peace,
 
Ronald V. Duncan
General Director

 

New conversations

It has been interesting to see the prolific growth of blogging within the Church of God. On my blogroll are listed as many as I am aware of, but I'm sure there are many others as well. Blogging is certainly representative of a new, decentralized media that permits a wide range of voices to contribute to important (and even unimportant) discussions.

But, blogging is only one example of the new conversations that are occurring across our movement. The latest involves Internet social networking, best represented currently through Facebook. New webs of communication are facilitated here. An example of the power of social networking conversations can be seen in a brief post that one of my "friends" started last week on Facebook. The topic was entitled "Church of God (Anderson) If we're so right...?" Within 8 hours over 32 responses had been shared, created a relatively vigorous discussion.

With whom are you talking?

Coaches event

Over the past few days I was in Phoenix for the second-ever Coaches event, designed specifically for coaches involved in either SHAPE or CTI (Coaches Training Initiative). Church of God Ministries has invested heavily in this event (along with Lily Endowment funds), believing that these are probably some of the most significant transformation agents for congregations and pastors. Approximately 100 were in attendance this year.

What has made these events so significant are the high caliber of resource people brought in and the timely topics addressed. This year was no exception. For example, David Ferguson (a return guest from last year) led us through a insightful examination of relational leadership. Gary Kinnaman spoke in our evening gatherings, challenging us to adopt beliefs, attitudes and practices that will contribute to bringing about healthy, lasting leadership. Our last morning together featured a presentation on holiness led by Jeannette Flynn (more on this in a future post).

A common theme that permeated the three days concerned the priority on relationships in ministry, certainly a message that is relevant for this time and the Church of God.

Update

Over the past month this blog has been considerably quiet. There just hasn't been much time for blogging.

In addition to taking some vacation time with my wife, there has been much activity within the district I serve. Our annual meeting was held on October 4th, at which time there was overwhelming support for a new structural change and bylaws that will transform our organization and ministry. This will have considerable impact on my workload as we transition in this new direction. The next year will be particularly demanding, but nevertheless exciting.

Today I am traveling to Phoenix for the second Church of God Coaches Event. As I reported last year, this was a milestone event in our history and reflects part of the cultural change among our leadership. Later this week I will post my reflections on this year's version.

Emerging leaders

Those of you subscribing to blogs will be interested in tracking The Sirius Network, a new "expanding group of people within the Church of God and beyond who are committed to creating a culture that nurtures young and emerging leaders". This is the result of work headed by Suzanne Haley of the Leadership Development Team within Church of God Ministries. They are wanting to connect emerging leaders in the Church of God and are tapping into contacts already made through our colleges and at the International Youth Convention. Besides the blog they also have Facebook and MySpace pages to foster the growing use of social media especially by younger generations.

Church planting revolution

The past few days I have been at Indian Creek Community Church in Olathe, Kansas (just outside of Kansas City) at the annual conference of Church Multiplication Association (CMA) for church planters. This has been one of the most significant Church of God events that I have been to in a long time.

For those of you that don't know, CMA is a Church of God - related organization that is leading the way in our movement for church planting. They have helped plant over 60 churches and have experienced tremendous success compared to most typical church planting efforts. Founded by Robin Wood and Gary Kendall, CMA provides a high level of screening, training, and support for church planters.

There are several reasons I consider this event as significant. First, it represents an exciting, new thrust in church planting. Sadly, in recent decades church planting has been hit and miss within the Church of God. While some tremendous new churches were launched, overall it is a small number and we have lacked a coherent vision or methodology.

Second, attending this event put me in contact with some of the most gifted and passionate young ministers in our movement. Seeing the quality of this group gives me great hope for the future!

Third, CMA represents a new paradigm in how we get things done within the Church of God. Despite our struggle with becoming a "denomination" the bulk of our cooperative efforts have been in centralized structures. CMA was not conceived in "Anderson". It is a network that operates within the Church of God, but not within our formal structures. This may go against what we are used to, but is indicative of a trend that is developing around us, and may be more congruent with our polity. Networks have tremendous effectiveness, and probably will represent the future in many other areas of our national life, such as missions. I was impressed to see that Church of God Ministries is not feeling threatened by the growing prominence of CMA, but instead is embracing this work and cooperating with it. The evidence of that is found in the fact that Dr. Duncan brought the Ministries Council to Olathe this week for their meeting, and so that they could experience first-hand what is happening in this "movement within a movement".

Finally, the event itself provided significant opportunities for personal growth and ministry development. CMA brought in some outstanding speakers and practitioners, and offered a wide range of helpful conferences and presentations. The evening worship services themselves were worth the trip. For example, on Tuesday evening I witnessed one of the most profound moments of honesty, transparency and grace confronting personal brokenness among leaders that I have seen in the Church of God.

If you are desiring to experience new vision and hope for the Church of God, I'd encourage you to learn more about CMA and to plan on attending next year's annual conference.

Women in Ministry article

Following up on the recent, lively discussion that resulted from my "Women in Ministry" post, I came across a sermon by Dr. David Sebastian, Dean of the Anderson School of Theology. This brief writing provides a good overview of the some key issues and scriptural passages at the center of the current debate, and is now an included resource for the "Cultivate" Goal comprising the Church of God strategic plan. It is worth reading.

LINK (The document "Women and Men: Guarding Our Sacred Partnership in Ministry" can be found under "New Resources" near the bottom of the page).

Hermeneutics

Those of you new to reading blogs may not really be aware that this is an interactive medium - you have an opportunity to interact with the author and other readers over each post. Reading the comments can be a great way to dig deeper into the topic and engage in a discussion. On this particular blog most of my posts receive a few comments, but my recent "Women in Ministry" post broke a new record for the number of responses. It obviously touched a nerve on this vital subject, and reveals its controversial nature and even the surprising diversity of opinion within the Church of God. If you haven't already done so, I encourage you to read the entire dialogue.

I limited my own responses, partly because some others took up the cause, but also because this is a subject that is really the result of some deeply held presuppositions regarding the nature of and interpretations of Scripture. Our understanding of whether or not women are called to pastoral ministry is based on what we believe is taught in the Bible. But the interpretation of these passages is obviously not that simple, based on the divergent views represented.

Biblical hermeneutics is an area that has caused considerable tension within our movement over our relatively short history. While we all agree on the authority of Scripture, how it fits into God's larger revelation and should be interpreted is not uniform, especially in recent decades. The influence of American Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism has impacted our perspectives and approaches to the point that our original holiness orientation to Scripture is largely over-shadowed.

The Church of God emerged out of pietism and Wesleyanism, as well as the holiness movement of the late 19th century. The result was a theological orientation that did not fit well with the dominance of Calvinistic thinking around it, or with the later modernistic debates that have shaped American conservative thinking. Our pioneers had a high view of Scripture but it is clear from their writings and ministry that the Bible was never an authority detached from God's larger revelation. The truth of Scripture was always dependent on the illumination of the Holy Spirit. And, Biblical truth, to be of value, expressed itself in praxis, or as we framed it: holiness. Truth was not some objective enterprise that stood apart from God, including the living Word (Jesus Christ) and the work of the Holy Spirit. Modern rationalism, however, changed the intellectual landscape of Western Christianity, with both liberalism and fundamentalism products of its worldview. Human reason became the standard by which truth is discovered and measured. Sadly, the Church of God has been distracted by these influences and many have bought into the rationalistic arguments that lead to a wooden (and often inconsistent) literalism and the red-herring logic behind inerrancy.

Not only concerning the women in ministry issue, but with all that draws us together doctrintally, it is essential that we come to terms with our understanding of and approach to Scripture. We would be wise to learn from the dynamic hermeneutic of the early Church of God. This is not to unrealistically romanticize our heritage. Certainly, even our hermeneutic has evolved and will need to continue to do so. For example, we have been weak at understanding the Bible within its original historical context, which is evident by the misguided apocalyptic ecclesiology that dominated our theology in our first half-century and still lives on in some sectors today.

Going back to the recent debate, I remain convinced that the calling of women to ministry leadership is consistent with the Gospel of Jesus and the practice of the New Testament church. For those of you that differ with this view, let's acknowledge and explore our hermenutic approaches. It's the real discussion we need in the Church of God.

Women in Ministry

An article in Ohio.com (Akron Beacon Journal) brought to light again the challenge we are having in the Church of God validating the ministry and leadership of women.

The good news is that Arlington Church of God, one of our prominent congregations, announced that Diana Swoope has been chosen to succeed Ron Fowler when he retires in the coming months. Beyond her local church, Swoope is well-known across the Church of God because of her national involvements and powerful preaching.

The newspaper article addresses the fact that women are having a harder time finding a church to pastor in the Church of God. Just over 10% of our senior pastors are women, a figure even more troubling considering the fact that at the beginning of our movement women had a much larger role. Unfortunately, again we've been influenced by the larger church culture around us, even when it conflicts with what we understand Scripture to teach. Sadly, many of our congregations resist the idea of having a female pastor, and even some of our current ordained ministers do not believe women should be in this role.

I celebrate the affirmation of Diana Swoope in Akron, Ohio, and hope that this will lead to more women called to career ministry finding their place in our congregations.

Review: Faith in the Future

For a slight change of pace I want to briefly comment on one of the new books published by Warner Press this year. Our publishing house releases several books every year, usually in conjunction with the North American Convention. Increasingly they are securing titles that can be marketed outside of our movement, and to the church at large.

While I do not have time to read or review every new Warner Press book, the one that caught my attention this year is Faith in the Future: Christianity's Interface with Globalization by Church of God missionary Patrick Nachtigall. I decided to purchase this because it covers a compelling topic that I don't hear discussed much in our circles.

Nachtigall's purpose in the book is to "look at some of the new things that are currently happening in our world so that Christians can be better informed and more prepared to engage the world with the gospel" (p. 2). As someone who has first-hand experience of living in different countries and cultures, Nachtigall brings his own personal experience and insight to the topic. He addresses a wide range of issues, including peace, poverty, sexual slavery and the environment. Some he sees as opportunities, others as challenges.

The value of this book will be in its application as a discussion starter, especially for mission-minded individuals and church groups. While I can't say that I learned much that I hadn't heard before, his drawing together of these issues provides for a great introduction, especially for the many Americans who seem to be somewhat insulated from the global trends happening around them.

Again, this book shines as an introduction and thought-starter. I was somewhat disappointed in that, for me, Nachtigall doesn't engage these issues enough with the gospel message and the implications for the church. He certainly touches on these components, but I expected more. Some may also be somewhat surprised and skeptical at his apparent over-optimism for some of the global trends that he writes about.

This is one of those books that is being marketed outside of the Church of God, and it is impressive to see the sharp design and layout of the book. This makes the book more attractive to those who tend to "judge a book by its cover". But, hopefully it will give Warner Press a bigger position within Christian bookstores, with the prospect that our voice will be heard more and wider in the future.

Addressing the Budget

Last week Church of God pastors were sent an email in regards to a special video message from General Director Ron Duncan concerning the current status of Church of God Ministries' budget. As we learned at the General Assembly, giving is down significantly and has been on a downward trend for several years.

Duncan's message is designed to communicate this message far and wide across the Church of God in North America. The facts and his plea need to be heard.

I think it is far too easy to look for simplistic explanations as to why this budget problem exists. Some might want to blame the economy or going disconnectedness with "Anderson", but I believe there are two reasons that especially stand out:

1. Undesignated giving is losing its value. This has been a trend developing for several decades now, and it not only affects giving to our national and regional bodies, but to local churches as well. Older generations gave out of sense of duty and obligation, whereas increasingly people today are giving where they see specific needs (e.g. missions projects, etc.). Obviously stewardship principles need to be reinforced, but this is a reality that is severely limiting the church's ministry at all levels.

2. Lack of clarity on the purpose of our national organization. While greater efforts have been made to express a vision for the Church of God in North America, it still has not filtered down to the local congregations where decisions are made whether to support Church of God Ministries. With many churches stuggling to meet their own local budgets, it is easy to see how cutting or eliminating support to "Anderson" is determined.

In resolving this we must get past our regrets, and pronouncements of "oughts" and "shoulds". The starting point must be facing the realities of the current situation, and from there we must inspire with a cooperative vision for our movement going forward. Otherwise, our budget problems will persist.

Get Up and March

In response to my request, Curtis Ferrell has given me permission to post the lyrics from the song he wrote, and sang Wednesday evening during NAC. Be sure also to watch and listen to it online.

Get Up And March!
Ferrell, Curtis L.

Verse 1:
This world doesn't need another satellite, spinnin' round,
Beamin' God's love to the ground.
This world doesn't need another TV preacher
Makin' all the saints fall down.
This world doesn't need another pretty Christian song
Playin' loud on the radio band.
What this world needs is for the church of God
To rise up and take a stand.

Chorus 1:
I'm talkin' 'bout love, I'm talkin' 'bout faith.
I'm talkin' 'bout mercy, I'm talkin' 'bout grace.
I'm talkin' 'bout healing, I'm talkin' 'bout peace.
I'm talkin' 'bout freedom, I'm talkin' 'bout sweet release.
Get up and march!

Verse 2:
This world doesn't need another superstar sayin' that
God helped him win the game.
This world doesn't need another Christian politician
Beggin' votes, power, money, and fame.
This world doesn't need another half a dozen cruise ships
Crusin' to the Holy Land.
What this world needs is for the church of God
To rise up and take a stand.


Chorus 2:
And live out love, living out faith.
Living out mercy, living out grace.
Living out healing, living out peace.
Living out freedom, living out sweet release.
Get up and march!

Verse 3:
Rise up, O church of God!
Have done with lesser things.
Give heart, and mind, and soul, and strength
To serve our King of Kings!
Rise up, O men of God!
The church for you doth wait
Her strength unequal to her task
Rise up, and make her great!
Get up and march!

Verse 4:
Like a mighty army
Moves the church of God;
Brothers, we are treading
Where the saints have trod:
We are not divided
All one body we,
One in hope and doctrine
One in charity.
Get up and march!

Verse 5:
Then forward let us go
Our hearts with love aflame
Our snowy banner borne aloft
Inscribed with Jesus name
The hosts of evil flee
And heaven's open gates
Invite us now to hasten
Where Eternal glory waits.
Get up and march!

Verse 6:
Must Jesus bear the cross alone,
And all the world go free?
No, there's a cross for everyone,
And there's a cross for you and me.

Bridge:
How will they believe If they have never heard?
How will they believe If they have never heard?
How will they believe If they have never heard?
How will they believe If they have never heard?

Ending:
How will they believe If they have never heard?
How will they believe

© 2001 Curtis L. Ferrell, 805 Crescent Drive, New Castle, IN 47362 (ASCAP)

NAC - Reflections

Now that the North American Convention is over and I am on my way home I have to time to reflect on the last week.

Overall, it was a positive experience. The opportunities for spiritual challenge and to connect with friends overshadowed the seemingly countless number of meetings that are part of my annual trek to Anderson. As I talked with others, it is apparent that virtually everyone else shared similar sentiments: The 2008 NAC is considered to have been a success.

Upon reflection, however, I wonder if perhaps the whole event has become too comfortable. It is a good experience, but hardly one that elicits much passion. The people who attend, many of them diehard fans who return regularly, come because it is an affirming environment. But, the overall trend of declining attendance suggests that for the vast majority of movement adherents this "campmeeting" is not a priority worth the expense and time commitment. The event has lost its drawing power, except for those who make it as an annual pilgrimage.

It is easy to delude ourselves into believing that this is the core, common experience of our movement. That may have been the case in the distant past when this "doctrinal practice" (as Strege would label it) was the primary means to define and unite our movement. In pure numbers and in proportion to our overall constituency fewer people are coming to the North American Convention. We fool ourselves to think that the high level of effort expended for it are in line with its real significance. Certainly, Church of God Ministries probably devotes more attention and activity to the NAC than anything else, but this may be misguided.

At one time in the Church of God, virtually everyone made it their goal to attend "Anderson Campmeeting" as often as possible. It was the "can't miss it" event of the year. But, this is no longer the case for the overwhelming majority. I was particulary aware of this reality when observing the General Assembly attendance and that an extremely small number of influential leaders and pastors were in attendance. The few that were made brief appearances and were hard to track down. Most did not take in the entire convention.

Am I down on the NAC?

Not at all. I happen to believe that corporate gatherings are one important aspect of our common identity and fellowship. But, I remain convinced that as our world has changed, so has our movement. An annual convention in Anderson as it is currently formatted is no longer relevant.

I am sure that the success of Sunday's global service will make it more difficult for many to see my case. The effective leveraging of technology is a positive step forward and has the potential to draw more people together across the Church of God. It was the highlight of this year's event. But, let's not be fooled, over the long run this still does not really address the need for drawing in the growing number of diverse congregations across North America and around the world.

I remain convinced that the proposal I outlined last year is still the best, realistic option available to us. We need more than cosmetic changes of the NAC. I doubt, however, that there is enough political will in the Midwest to relinquish the sacredness of our current format.

I will continue, however, to be a voice from the geographic fringes calling for fresh, new approaches to propel our movement into the future.

NAC - Wednesday

It's hard to believe the final day of the North American Convention has come and gone!

Today began with the final session of the General Assembly. As usual attendance was lower, and it made me wonder how legitimate the GA's authority is considering the extremely low participation. There was no earth-shattering business, although a new baseline budgeting process was approved. (For more details see twitter.com/chogblog)

Tonight was the final service, focused on missions. In the past this was the climax of the week, with attendance overflowing. Wednesday evening no longer has the same lustre - attendance was among the lowest of all week in my assessment.

Paul Sheppard preached and delivered a fitting send-off message, although he seemed far from the assigned text. UPDATED 06/30/08: Curt Ferrell sang another poignant song that I am assuming he wrote (Possible title: "Get Up and March"?). People were captivating by the words and the rhythm. (Curt: Please confirm the details for us!)

This service has traditionally ended with a "pass it on" candlelight ceremony. Since moving into the Kardatzke Wellness Center they moved from candles to chemical light sticks (not quite the same effect!) and the whole exercise was getting quite predictable. This year we all lit our sticks together after long colored ribbons were run through the auditorium and lifted after the benediction creating a joyous spectacle.

And after saying our final goodbyes we headed outside to experience the increasing humidity. Fortunately, the hot, humid weather is just about to kick-in here in Anderson and we will avoid it! Overall, weatherwise, this was one of the most pleasant conventions that I can remember.

Tomorrow I will write some final comments and reflections on this year's NAC.

NAC - Tuesday

Tuesday at the North American Convention marks the start of General Assembly.

My blow by blow account of the GA can be seen at my twitter log (twitter.com/chogblog). Probably the biggest "news" today concerned the budgetary struggle that Church of God Ministries is facing. Giving is down and for 2008 there will be a 10% spending reduction. But this is more than a one-time occurrence. It is part of an ongoing downward trend and obviously this could have severe long-term implications projected forward. Apart from this, the GA was positive. Although, in some ways it felt like we were all just going through the motions - our annual ritual.

Of course, the most touching moment of GA is the annual memorial service. This year saw almost 80 individuals recognized, including some very well known ones of our movement such as Gerald Marvel, Horace Sheppard, Gilbert Stafford, and Oral Withrow.

It was fitting that Rod Stafford (Gil's brother) was tonight's preacher. Sharing the pain he experienced over the past year, he gave a forward-looking message that included an audio segment from Gilbert's last sermon. This led to a conclusion centered around an annointing service, something led at the NAC last year by Gil. We all left experiencing grace and hope.

NAC - Monday

For me, the highlights of today centered around two conferences held in Byrum Hall.

First, was the annual Doctrinal Dialogue sponsored by the School of Theology. I believe that these types of experiences are extremely valuable, and we need many more of these forums for exchange and discussion. This year's theme was on the biblical view of creation, and featured a paper presented by Dr. James Christoph of Warner Southern College. (Papers can be downloaded from the SOT website). The content was very good, but perhaps too sketchy because of the time available and I found participants all danced around the issue to some extent knowing the controversial nature of the subject matter and the emotional responses it generates.

Immediately following there was an open forum with Ronald Duncan and his recent paper on congregationalism. Obviously, with my recent blog coverage I was especially keen to see what kind of reaction he would receive. I was particularly impressed with Dr. Duncan's genuine interest to generate dialogue, and his passion for the church. Despite what some may say, this is no top-down pronouncement. There were good questions and comments from the audience, with almost everyone affirming his observations and concerns. My only disappointments were that the attendance wasn't great (less than 70), and the people who disagree with his paper didn't seem to be present or at least engaging the issues.

Today's speaker was Cynthia James, Area Administrator in Northern California. She brought an amazing combination of thoughtfulness and energy to her message based on Ephesians 4:11.

This year from Monday to Wednesday the same person preaches both services. There is some confusion among convention goers as to whether these are the same sermons, but at different times and worship experiences. Apparently this is not the case (even though they are preaching from the same text), but for the future this needs to be clarified.

A look at the gathering area in front of the Kardatzke Wellness Center:

All we need are some rides!

General Assembly to be Twittered

Those of you familiar with this relatively new communication technology will be interested to learn that I will be twittering live from this year's General Assembly which will start on Tuesday morning.

Twittering is text messaging on steriods, and allows for the wide distribution of short messages to friends and other interested persons. Messages can be read in your web browser, on your cell phone, through an RSS feed, or on the sidebar of this blog's main page.

The new CHOGblog twitter can be accessed at:
http://twitter.com/chogblog

If you are unable to attend this year's GA you will be able to take advantage of live updates throughout the sessions on Tuesday and Wednesday. If you are attending the GA you might still want to subscribe to the twitter to hear my comments and to feedback some of your own.

Admittedly this is an experiment. I doubt many will take advantage of it this year, but it will be a way to try out a new technology (and will keep me awake during those long, dry spots in the GA!).

NAC - Sunday

2008 will be remembered as a significant year in the history of "Anderson Campmeeting". Tonight's service marked an attempt to bring the North American Convention to the larger church since fewer people are actually making the trek to Anderson.

Through the use of technology tonight's service was broadcast live to over 200 churches in a number of countries around the world who watched this service and participated in simultaneous communion. Actually, live broadcasting of the services is not new, with streaming live video having been available for several years now. This service was a milestone because it was a deliberate effort to have people congregate in various locations to watch and express unity through the Lord's Supper. It was called the largest gathering in the history of the Church of God.

The experience exceeded my expectations. It was obviously well planned by the CBH team, taking into consideration the unique needs of audiences at distant locations watching on video screens. This was not a normal service with worship followed by preaching. Hosted by Jim Lyon and Robbie Davis it was a diverse celebration that also featured some live worship from Crossings Community Church in Oklahoma City, and several other live and taped greetings from other CBH locations globally.

The communion experience itself was unique as the platform participants sat around tables and took the elements after sharing Scripture read in several different languages.

Without question this will become a regular event of the NAC and its new tradition and highlight.

I have never seen so many communion sets in one place:

NAC - Saturday

Even though Saturday is the official first full day of the North American Convention, it is still a low-keyed time compared to when things start picking up Sunday when even more people arrive.

For me, today was spent primarily in meetings pertaining to Area Administrators. This included a session with writer Milfred Minatrea, author of the book Shaped by God's Heart: The Passion and Practices of Missional Churches.

Despite last night's Anderson University sponsored celebration, Saturday evening marks the true keynote service of the convention. Without introduction the service began with Church of God historian Merle Strege setting the tone with some reflections on our movement's struggle to put unity into practice. Curt Ferrell is this year's evening worship leader and as part of his contribution shared again his powerful song, "One Body, One Spirit, One Lord". This was a signficant climax that followed and made up for what seemed to be first night jitters and technical glitches.

General Director Ron Duncan was our speaker tonight and focused on love as the key to unity, asking us to consider "What kind of church do you have?" The significance of Duncan's message went beyond words. Following his sermon he led in a public demonstration of the unity needed in God's church. Three denominational leaders plus GA chair Bob Moss (representing other church communions) were seated on stage while Duncan, and leaders from the National Assocation, the Hispanic Concilio, and Native American Council washed the feet of these four men. It was a significant act that leaves a strong impression on us as we ponder the implications of unity within a largely fractured Body of Christ.

Fitting to tonight's theme, it was interesting to see in attendance a contingent of individuals from one of the conservative splinters of our movement:

NAC - Friday

For me, Friday at the North American Convention, was an opportunity to connect with a number of friends and associates including my Area Administrator SHAPE cluster.

The convention itself kicked off this evening with the annual Anderson University service, a gathering of celebration centered mainly around music. This Gaither production was jam-packed with singing, musical performances (including by NFL player / singer Ben Utecht), and brief personal stories from Ann Smith, Mort Crim, Dr. Lauren Dungy-Poythress, and Bill Gaither). The highlight was a powerful AU choral rendition of "I Then Shall Live", a song with profound lyrics by Gloria Gaither set to the tune of Finlandia. This year's convention theme is "Celebrate Unity", and tonight's service celebrated God's Gentle Strength.

In striking contrast to tonight's biblical theme was a T-shirt message spotted in the crowd:

I must be in the Midwest!

History of the NAC

As thousands head to the center of our universe this week, I would encourage the reading of an article published in the Anderson Herald Bulletin newspaper and available on the Church of God website. The article gives a very brief, but informative overview of the development of our annual gathering, from camp meetings to the North American Convention it is now.

Off to the NAC

You will probably notice that I have been somewhat quiet here on CHOGBlog for the last month. As I previously indicated, I have been extraordinarily busy as a whole host of responsibilities, challenges, and deadlines have converged on me. There are some topics I want to address here (including some further thoughts on congregationalism), but have had to set that aside for the moment in order to retain balance and sanity.

Tomorrow I am off to the North American Convention of the Church of God in Anderson, Indiana, which begins this weekend. While for me the NAC is packed full of meetings and obligations, I am looking forward to allowing this also to be a time of refreshment and spiritual nourishment. As I have done in the past, I will be blogging daily on my experiences.

I am also pleased to announce the First-ever CHOGBlog Get Together at the NAC:

Sunday evening
9:30pm
at Starbucks
(4235 Scatterfield Road, Anderson)

If you can be there, I would love to meet you!

Connecting through CHOGnews

Life has been extremely busy lately, so I haven't delivered yet on my concluding posts on congregationalism.

But, in the meantime...

Church of God Ministries has recently launched CHOGnews a monthly e-mail newsletter devoted to "News and Information about the Church of God". This is obviously in response to the demise of ONEvoice last year, and the desire for more communication to keep us connected. There is also a print version available as a PDF download for churches to copy and distribute to those without e-mail.

In our electronic age this is a long-overdue step, and certainly will fill a much-needed gap. It's not the only communication we need, but it is a welcome initiative.

You can subscribe HERE.

Blogger: Wayne Warner

Before I continue on my comments on congregationalism I want to highlight another Church of God blog worth noting. Wayne Warner, a retired Church of God minister who has done extensive writing. His new blog, "Warner's World", is a new avenue for him to share his provocative thoughts and ideas. I bring this up now because, in light of my recent discussion, I encourage you to read his post on "Church of God and Mutual Accountability".

Congregationalism - The struggle with individualism

In the next two posts I want to declare and elaborate on some of my thoughts concerning the recent discussion on congregationalism.

Interestingly, some of the opposition to Dr. Duncan's paper I've heard is based on the assertion that autonomy is not a bad thing and is a safeguard from the hierarchical, denominationalism that we have traditionally resisted.

While I have trouble finding this counter-argument promoted in Scripture, I easily understand why many have bought into it outright or have been strongly influenced by it. We live in a society that has elevated the individual to the highest position. "I" am the most important entity, and everything is viewed through this ego-centric filter. As a result, congregations are also seen as autonomous and independent.

Sadly, this heightened individualism and independence has been adopted by much of Western Christianity. Spiritual narcissism places the emphasis on "Jesus and me", with community values downplayed or almost ignored. Worldly values have crowded out biblical ones. It is no wonder autonomy is so highly regarded.

Certainly, our faith is personal, but it should never be private. Scripture consistently paints a picture of individuals as part of God's larger collective people: Israel, Kingdom of God, Church, Body of Christ, etc. While we encounter God as individuals, we live out our faith through our participation with and through God's People. As individuals our lives are to be interwoven with those of others: "each member belongs to all the others" (Romans 12:5b NIV).

The Church of God emphases on holiness and unity express an essential balance between the life of the individual and God's vision for the church. I believe, however, that we have had trouble fully developing our ecclesiology in practical ways. We were good at deconstructing the church as it was in the late 19th century, but poor at translating our ideals into tangible forms. Our abhorrence to organization prevented intentional developments, and instead resulted in haphazard creations that often lacked effectiveness. And it is not only with our national and regional structures that we have struggled to find ourselves, but even at the congregational level itself. It is important to remember that at the beginning of the Reformation Movement there was virtually no form to local congregations. Local church structures themselves were perceived as part of the problem, and this coupled with our eschatology and enthusiasm negated the formal establishment of congregations. Over time, however, the need for congregational structures became apparent and were developed, although as a reaction to necessity instead of proactive design for mission.

If we are going to grapple with the issue of congregationalism we must honestly address the underlying assumptions that have shaped our beliefs and practices. Then we can begin to find healthy expressions for church life. More on that in my next post...

Congregationalism paper - responses

I am somewhat surprised with the dialog that has been going on in response to Dr. Duncan's paper concerning congregationalism. I will write my personal comments on all of this in a subsequent post, but for now I want to share the buzz that I have been hearing on the matter.

Since posting the notification of the paper a few weeks ago, I have been involved in a number of conversations with people. You can read for yourself the various comments that were posted on this blog, but as you probably know only a very small percentage of readers ever take the time to actually post a comment. Some have e-mailed me privately, and I have been involved in several verbal discussions as well.

Overall, most people I've had contact with agree with Dr. Duncan's general premises. But, the stumbling block that I hear most people facing are the potential practical implications of all of this. There is a recognition that something must be done to overcome rugged congregational individualism, but naturally, considering our heritage, virtually no one wants to create a denominational monster complete with top-down hierarchy and rigid structures of accountability.

There are, however, other views as well. Certainly I have heard a couple of rare individuals who have expressed that maybe we need to become less congregational and adopt a more presbyterian (small "p") polity.

And, there are those who think Dr. Duncan is leading us down the wrong path. Some, it appears to me, are just plain suspicious of anything that comes out of Anderson, believing that this is an attempt to center more control in our national offices. Others, believe that there is nothing wrong at all with our congregationalism, and therefore this discussion is a waste of time.

Of course, there is large apathetic group that are so preoccupied with their own stuff that they don't care or see any value in the matter. Nevertheless, based on what I am hearing so far, this is an issue that touches a nerve for many people.

I think it is extremely healthy that we engage in this dialogue and confront head on some of the assumptions, both right and wrong, that have shaped our beliefs and practice.

More to come.

Doctrinal Leaders

In light of Gilbert Stafford's recent death, I was intrigued with an insightful post at Seminary Blog regarding "Doctrinal Leaders" in the Church of God.

Check it out.

Congregationalism paper

Several months ago I posted on the draft edition of a paper that General Director Ronald Duncan wrote concerning congregationalism. In case you have not already received a copy of the final edition, you can download it from the Church of God Ministries website.

I'd be interested in your comments.

Labeling

One of the most tragic results of a divided universal church is the increased tendency toward using labels as a way to perpetuate disunity. And, I am not just talking about denominational labels.

A sign of our times, particularly in the polarized political climate of the United States, is the large chasms that are created by using the labels "conservative" and "liberal" in political, social and religious settings. As a movement which has resisted dividing the church based on human categories, we too have easily succumb to this form of divisiveness.

Labels themselves are not evil. They are useful to describe things. The danger comes, however, when we use labels as a simplistic way to set ourselves over and above others, and to attack people who differ with us by resorting to pejorative attacks based on nomenclature. It is too easy for a liberal to put down a conservative, or a conservative to attack a liberal. It's a great way to shut someone up, instead of really getting to know them and their ideas.

Few even understand these designations. Many assumptions and prejudices are formed in people's minds surrounding these labels, and most are not grounded on any real understanding of the issues.

It should be no surprise to most reading this that the Church of God predominately tends toward conservatism. There are very few real liberals among us. But, of course, for staunch conservatives anyone who does not agree with their worldview must be a liberal. The fact is that most of the schisms and splits that have occurred in our movement are the product of conservative factions that have emerged.

Interestingly, Scripture promotes neither a conservative nor a liberal agenda, at least by current standards. These are human perspectives that are imposed upon the message of Jesus. What people fail to see is that liberals and conservatives are simply flip sides of the same coin. That is, they are actually more similar than they are different, simply because they share the same modern philosophical roots. While they appear to have different worldviews, looking beneath the surface it becomes clear that both liberals and conservatives are products of the Enlightenment, bowing at the altar of reason to the point of extinguishing the flame of the Spirit.

I consider myself as neither liberal or conservative. But, as a follower of Jesus I recognize that I have many brothers and sisters in Christ who might fit into either the conservative or liberal camps. Our goal should be to rise above the rhetoric and find our center and ground in Christ, and to avoid being taken in by those who promote a lordship outside of Jesus, such as conservatism or liberalism.

For us in the Church of God it is especially important that we put our unity teachings into practice and avoid labels that fracture the Body of Christ. Do we really extend our fellowship to "every blood washed one"?

As traditional denominational loyalty disintegrates in our society, perhaps ideological labeling is the new denominationalism that is dividing the church.

How committed are we to our message to do something about this?

Remembering Gilbert Stafford

I was saddened to learn of the death of Dr. Gilbert Stafford yesterday (March 30th).

This is a significant loss for the Church of God. Dr. Stafford has been our most noteworthy theologian in recent years. But, despite his sharp mind, prominent seminary teaching, and significant written contributions, he was not merely an academician. Stafford was truly a pastoral scholar. From his own extensive pastoral experience he understood firsthand that theology was not merely an abstract exercise, but very practical. He also expressed this through his love and passion for the church and this movement.

Frequently I hear people asking where the Church of God theologians are. This week one of them is with our Lord.

Basics for ... Living - II

My recent post, Basics for ... Living, generated some valuable responses to my suggestion that we need more thoughtful discussion (i.e. books, etc.) on what holiness really should look like in today's world. Generally, commenters recognized the need, but suggested that we are either too afraid to really get into this discussion or too prone to narrow, rigid positions.

I raised this question because I remain convinced that at the core of our Church of God identity is the emphasis on the practical outworking of faith. Yes, we do struggle with defining the implications of holiness today, and as result have tip-toed around the subject. I would be the last person to suggest that there is, or even should be, a Church of God "standard" for all aspects of behavior. Legalism is not consistent with the message of Jesus. But, our failure to help people wholly integrate their faith into their daily lives renders our teaching on holiness inert.

One person suggested "starting a praxis discussion here". While I hope interaction of this nature will take place far beyond this blog, this can be a good starting point for some of us. Watch for opportunities in the coming weeks.

He is risen!

Basics for ... Living

I received a postcard advertisement in the mail today from Warner Press promoting the second edition of their Basics for Belief book that will be published this year. It is a book designed to answer the question, "What do Church of God people believe?", especially because "newcomers want to know how our beliefs compare to those of other Christians".

I haven't seen this book, but I'm sure it is a fine writing. It appears to be an updated, edited compilation of some previous doctrinal writings by noteworthy Church of God leaders.

My question, however, is: Why is Warner Press not publishing books pertaining to HOW we should be living as followers of Christ? For a praxis movement emphasizing holiness would it not be important for us to present teachings on what holiness looks like in today's world?

It's much easier to churn out doctrinal writings than thoughtful, engaging discussions on the implications of our doctrines.

Blogging is good for your social life

On a lighter note...

According to a post at TechCrunch, "a new study has found Bloggers are better adjusted and live healthier, happier social lives."

And, some of you thought I was crazy!

What draws us together? - II

Last week I had the privilege to spend some valuable time with one of our African American ministers. It was a good discussion on a number of levels, but one matter in particular caught my attention, especially in light of a my previous post, "What draws us together?", and the discussion that followed.

We talked about how our four African American congregations could be better drawn into the overall fellowship of our district. The reality, however, is that it is not only a black-white issue. The Pacific Northwest Association is probably the most diverse regional district within the Church of God, and I'm not just talking about race. Beyond the diversity represented in African American, Hispanic, and Native American churches, we also have a very wide spectrum of congregations in terms of ministry philosophy and, dare I say, even theological perspective. Much of this can be attributed to the unique challenges we face living in the most unchurched and highly secularized area of the country.

The tentative solution we explored in our talk is that our unity is likely not going to be achieved merely by trying to get everyone to participate in common events and programs. While such corporate practices are ways that we can tangibly experience our togetherness, the reality is that even when we come together it is almost impossible to find fully meaningful expressions that truly take into account the diverse cultures across our expansive region, which covers portions of three states. Some bemoan the fact that there is less of a Church of God "style" in language, worship, etc. than in past generations, but this is a reality of the diverse nature of the Body of Christ at large, of which we are committed to uphold over our "denominational" provincialisms.

We must be reminded that our unity is first and foremost in Christ. But, we must even be reminded what that means. This unity in Christ is not just a sterile assent to certain doctrinal beliefs concerning Christ. It is recognizing that as a result of the sacrificial life of Jesus we are also to take up the cross and follow him. That is, through the church to join his Kingdom effort within the world.

In other words, mission is the primary way that we are to express our unity. More often than not we have been distracted by other attempts at uniformity and conformity merely through doctrine and corporate practices, and have failed to demonstrate the most important way that we can rally together under the lordship of Christ.

NAC changes

I recently received a packet of materials from Church of God Ministries pertaining to this summer's North American Convention.

Two things in particular stood out to me:

1. This year's preaching schedule from Monday through Wednesday appears to have the same speaker and sermon each day. In other words, two identical? services each day but at different times. This is a radical departure from the previous format, but in truth the morning services have not been well attended in recent years. I'd be interested to hear the rationale for this change, but it is evident that they are experimenting with changes because of new realities.

2. I was very disappointed to see that this year there is no guest speaker from outside our movement. This has been a personal highlight for me in recent years (e.g. Reggie McNeal and Jim Wallis) and is important for us to have input from the outside.

As I've indicated before, we need to rethink the role of the NAC and be willing to think outside the box. The changes proposed this year are hardly steps in that direction.

What draws us together?

The matter of autonomy versus accountability is a significant discussion topic right now in the Church of God. This was evidenced in my recent post, "Congregationalism", and in the comments that followed. And, I hear this discussion coming up in many other settings as well.

As a movement we struggle because we are wanting to affirm our identity, but are frustrated because we have been largely stagnate, as one commenter noted.

Some are concerned that the move toward greater structural accountability is a move away from our core beliefs and values, and that we will become another denomination. I understand the concern, but I think it misses the point, and is a hyper-spiritualized smokescreen that avoids our sinful independence.

All of this seems to beg some more foundational questions that we must ultimately address: What is it about the Church of God that is unique? What is it that should unite us and draw us together?

The answers cannot be fully explored in this one post (and may require several, and even a book!), but some basic observations can be made.

For the most part, and in real terms, we have found our commonality in our doctrines and practices. Gilbert Stafford, in his two Crossroads books, asserted this and bemoaned the dilution of these two elements within our movement. Certainly, when we grasp for ways to define ourselves we tend to end up at our doctrinal distinctives (i.e. holiness, unity, healing, amillenialism, etc.) and corporate practices (i.e. campmeetings, music, publications, institutions, etc.). I believe, however, that Stafford's solution is far too shallow and misses the dynamic that was at the genesis of the Church of God. Yes, our doctrines and practices are markers of who we are and have importance. But, I would contend that they are themselves inadequate foundations for making us the movement we believe God wants us to become.

I believe the answer we are seeking for can be found looking back to the beginning of our movement.

The energy that drove the earliest pioneers was a sense of mission. They were enthusiastically convinced that God was using them to draw His church together in holiness, and they were prepared to radically deliver that message everywhere and using virtually any available means. They allowed themselves to be directed by the Spirit in amazing ways.

As with any reformation movement, the brazen energy of our founders began to fade after the first decade or so. Some self-doubt set in, and the saints themselves settled into more routine and structure. Soon the mission itself was gradually replaced with talking about the mission and glorying in past accomplishments. Doctrine and practices became our rallying points. We also bought into the rational Christianity of Evangelicalism, and were largely constrained by Midwestern Christian culture.

If we are to recapture our place as a movement it must be around a clear mission of what it is we believe God has called us to do. This mission must be more than a stated ideal, but a commitment to Christ that expresses itself in practical action. As I see it, our sense of and involvement in mission is the element that will revitalize the Church of God. Fortunately, there are signs here and there of that already beginning to happen.

What exactly, then, is our mission today?

To dance or not to dance?

The Church of God proudly promotes holy living, and for the bulk of our history we have had generally accepted guidelines of what that looks like. Yet, the list of sinful behaviors has changed over the years, and has included obvious vices like smoking and alcohol, and less obvious ones like wearing neckties and even visiting bowling alleys. Dancing is also an activity that has been traditionally scorned, but over time has seen less opposition by movement adherents.

Early this month a major turning point occurred at our flagship institution of higher learning, Anderson University. After years of pressure and coming to terms with its inconsistent policies, AU held its first on-campus dance, a move officially endorsed by the school's board of trustees. Has dancing now joined the list of other practices once shunned, but now accepted, or at minimum tolerated?

The Anderson Herald-Bulletin newspaper has an article detailing this development.

The truth is, despite that a significant contingent of Church of God people think dancing is one of the great sins that leads to all sorts of debauchery, this is no longer the general view held by our membership. While there are forms and presentations of dancing that raise concern, most people recognize that a blanket rejection of it as an activity or art form is not reasonable, and certainly not biblical. We even have congregations across the country who occasionally have dances or offer dancing lessons.

Obviously, the news out of AU is highly disturbing for those Church of God stalwarts who cling to a view of holiness that is all about externalism.

For me the shift in our dancing policies and practices is not the real issue, and not just because I have two left feet and can't dance even if I wanted. The issue is: How are we understanding and practicing what it means to be holy?

Sadly, a thoroughgoing engagement with holiness is not something we do, despite our assertions. Throughout our history we have missed the boat when we have reduced holiness to rigid adherence to individualistic legalism. This misapplication of Scripture flies in the face of the
Spirit-directed life which should mark our lives. The result has been self-righteousness, judgmentalism, and the extinguishing of the Spirit's work. And, hypocrisy abounds especially as it has resulted in a lop-sided holiness that virtually ignores other expressions of a holy life, including our social involvements.

The reaction to this wooden holiness has also not been always helpful. As the Herald-Bulletin article reveals, some of the responses to our restrictions can be reactionary. It is easy for the pendulum to swing too far or for the wrong reasons.

What am I saying in all of this?

I believe that the Church of God must be committed to re-engage in an exploration of what holiness is all about. In doing this we must be prepared to move beyond our constricted views from the past and toward a much fuller understanding as demonstrated by Jesus and expressed in Scripture. This will be one of the topics of my upcoming book.

In the end we may acknowledge that we are a dancing people after all.

Congregationalism

Last week I was in Saint Augustine, Florida for the annual Area Administrator's retreat. It was a good time to connect with colleagues from across the continent and to exchange ideas and experiences.

General Director Ronald Duncan was with us for the week, and shared a paper he wrote entitled "Congregationalism and the Church of God Reformation Movement: A Needed Conversation". It was still a draft edition, but the intent is to have a final version ready for distribution in the not too distant future.

Certainly this is a needed conversation. As Duncan says, our "understanding of congregationalism has functioned largely as an unquestioned assumption in the life of the church", and that many have seen it "as synonymous with independence or unlimited autonomy".

In the paper Duncan traces the development of congregational polity from Scripture through to its implementation in our movement. He argues that things started to unravel for us around the late 60s or early 70s. Rampant individualism in society, carried over into the local church and into the Church of God at a larger level. "Unlimited autonomy within an increasingly loosely connected congregational system" has become the accepted norm, but Duncan correctly points out that this is "totally alien to a biblical understanding of the body of Christ". Nevertheless, the result of all this is disconnection, isolation, and loss of trust. He even goes on to call this "an insidious cancer in the life of the church".

The remedy, according to Duncan, is covenantal relationships, both within and among congregations. Responsibility of all involved is critical, and leads to interdependence that is centered on mission. This should radically shape the way we function as a movement.

I affirm what Dr. Duncan is writing. If we are going to have any impact as a movement we must address what it means to belong to "Church of God" and the implications of this belonging. Sadly, the Church of God has sold itself out to the prevailing attitudes of society and Evangelicalism, even when it deeply conflicts with what we understand as truth. Even more tragically, we have failed to acknowledge these influences.

Hopefully Duncan's paper will lead us to confront these issues. Be sure to read it when it is officially released.