Are You Sure You're Right? - Inerrancy

This post is part of a series based on chapters from the new Church of God book by Jerry Hickson, Are You Sure You're Right? (For more information see my review).

 

If Jerry Hickson was wanting to get our attention through his book, he certainly does so in the very first chapter: "Does the Bible Have a Greater Threat than the Thumper?". In keeping with the overall purpose of the book,  revealing the differences between the Church of God and American Evangelicalism, Hickson makes the point that Biblical "Inerrancy is a modern concept foreign to the Bible" (p. 11) and "is a concept that is foreign to Church of God heritage" (p. 12).

 

That ought to go over well.

 

Conservative Christians uphold a high view of Scripture, especially in light of the perceived threat of liberalism. The 70's publication of The Battle for the Bible cemented the concept of inerrancy among evangelicals, and was easily adopted by many within the Church of God as well. On the surface, inerrancy seems to make sense if we accept the inspiration and authority of Scripture. On closer examination, however, there are many problems with this position because of the faulty philosophical and theological foundations on which it is based.

 

In my view, inerrancy is really part of the bigger issues of epistemology and hermeneutics. Dr. Hickson seems to understand this, pointing out correctly that the doctrine of inerrancy is really a product of modern rationalism (pp. 4f). Fundamentalism, and Evangelicalism which developed out of it, have deep roots in the modern worldview, especially as result of their work in defending themselves against liberalism. Since Are You Sure You're Right? is written to a general audience it is difficult to develop this technical discussion without losing most readers. Hickson makes an attempt, but chooses to focus mainly on the symptomatic matter of inerrancy. I'm just not sure everyone will hear him. As I stated in my review, I wish he would have provided more background to the development of the Church of God within broader Christianity prior to entering into this thorny issue.

 

The problem most people will have is that they perceive the questioning of inerrancy as an attack on biblical inspiration and authority. People will mistakenly argue that Hickson must therefore believe that there are "errors" in Scripture with the logical conclusion that Scripture cannot be trusted. This is not the case, unless you require a logical argument to prove the veracity of Scripture, in which case the divine, inspirational nature of Scripture is downplayed and made subservient to the idol of human reason. Hickson makes this bold statement: "We deny the authority of the Bible if we believe inerrancy is the proof of its authority" (p. 3).

 

Without question, the Church of God has typically maintained a high view of Scripture. But, as Hickson points out, early Church of God leaders never really got into the liberal-fundamentalist debates of the early 20th century. Our movement has always held a more dynamic view towards truth, mainly because of our emphasis on the work of the Holy Spirit. This has tremendous implications for how we understand both inspiration and interpretation, and differs markedly from the more rational preoccupation of evangelicals. The latter place a much higher emphasis on the importance of faith as the intellectual assent to certain doctrines. The holiness perspective tends to rise above this cold rationalism, placing the focus on the life-changing work of the Spirit as the test of faith, rejecting the notion of air-tight creeds and doctrinal statements. Of course, over the years, because of the creeping influence of Evangelicalism within the Church of God, these distinctions have become confused.

 

As I have previously stated, this chapter will likely be highly controversial within our circles. I hope, however, that people will take the time to read this chapter carefully and enter into constructive dialogue. It is a matter worth exploring, especially in light of our holiness orientation.

 

Review: Are You Sure You're Right?

This spring Warner Press is publishing several new books, including a couple that provide self-examination and reflection for the Church of God. My intent is to use this blog as a place to discuss these writings and to provoke dialogue that hopefully will be helpful to us all.

 

When I first heard that Jerry Hickson was writing this book I was excited since it is a topic that has long been on my mind. It's just that I've never had the courage to put my own thoughts down on paper. I'm glad that someone has taken the risk to engage this important, yet potentially controversial, matter.

 

Are You Sure You're Right?: Evangelicals and the Church of God (Warner Press, 2006) may not be the best book to come out of our publishing house in recent years, but it may be one of the most important. Dr. Hickson, assistant professor of Christian ministry at Warner Pacific College, strives to challenge the commonly held notions that the Church of God is part of American Evangelicalism. He identifies and explains some of the differences between current evangelical and Church of God teachings, and does so with doctrinal discussion, historical context, and references to other Church of God authors.

 

Specifically, Hickson addresses eight points where the Church of God takes a divergent position from most evangelicals: the inerrancy of Scripture, Calvinistic determinism, premillenial eschatology, the ordination of women, the place of pastoral education, allegiance to American civil religion, the right to life, and Christian unity. A common theme throughout the book is that "Despite all the ways in which we agree, the Church of God does not fit well in the evangelical stream of Christianity" (p. xii).

 

This message will obviously be unsettling to many people within the Church of God. Because of struggling with our self-identity as movement it has been convenient for us to become closely aligned with this large, popular branch of Christian conservatism. It has got to the point that for many of our leaders and constituents the distinctions are blurred or seemingly non-existent. This book should awaken us to these changes and hopefully spur us on to rediscover our unique heritage and distinctives.

 

Still, Are You Sure You're Right? will generate considerable controversy. Warner Press as much as admits it by statements on the book's cover and in the Publisher's Preface (p. vii). I admire the risk that is being taken in publishing this book as this in itself bodes well for our movement. But, I am afraid that many will misunderstand what Dr. Hickson is saying and probably label him as a "liberal", or just simply ignore his insights.

 

It doesn't help that Hickson begins his discussion with probably the most sensitive issue: The fundamentalist and evangelical position on the inerrancy of Scripture. Since many Church of God folk buy into this tenet, there is an uphill battle right from page one in gaining their ear. A careful look at history and theology confirms what Dr. Hickson is saying, but I suspect many will tune him out at this early stage before reading the entire book with an open and honest mind. I wish, instead, that he would have begun the book by outlining the historical development and context of the Church of God within American Christianity. The fact is most people do not understand our own history, let alone the underlying assumptions and biases within Evangelicalism. He deals with some of these issues in the two appendices, but again it is likely that many will miss these observations due to their defensiveness over what they've already read.

 

There are other important insights that can be gleaned by the open-minded reader. For example, the last chapter, "Can We All Get Along?", is very helpful, as is chapter four on gender. Unfortunately, however, some other chapters (such as the ones on pastoral education and right-to-life) seem out of place or underdeveloped.

 

Despite the obstacles confronting this book, I hope that people will read it as this type of discussion is long overdue within the Church of God. We have been good at looking inward, but for the first time in a long time we have a book that attempts to describe and confront our relationship with the larger church. Again, I commend both Jerry Hickson and Warner Press for providing this opportunity to probe into these issues.

 

In short, this is a must read.

 

Over the next couple of weeks I will devote individual posts to each of the chapters in the book. Hopefully a constructive dialogue can ensue that will better enable us to rediscover our own identity and become a strong, alternative voice within the confused world of modern Christianity.

 

The Stresses of Ministry

I am very grateful for the opportunity I had recently for a vacation. We all need times to get away from our normal routines and experience some refreshment and rejuvenation.

 

Maybe it's just because I was in this altered state, but upon reflection I notice that I've been hearing alot about stressed-out pastors recently. Over the past month I have had numerous opportunities to talk with other ministers first-hand, and also to hear stories of colleagues that are going through difficult times in their personal lives and careers. This includes pastors that are leaving their churches (or even pastoral ministry altogether) because of the overbearing frustrations that they are experiencing; and spouses of pastors who are discouraged and angry because of what is going around them.

 

It's difficult to know exactly what is going in all these situations, and much too easy to make simplistic analyses and prescriptions. But, I am concerned about the health of our pastoral leadership as I know that there are many who are struggling and close to drowning in the churches they are currently in.

 

This all raises questions in my mind about a number of issues:

• How adequate are the support systems available for pastors and families?
• Is our polity and structure part of the problem or the solution?
• Are we doing enough in screening and training those entering into career ministry?
• What really is our theology concerning pastoral leadership?
• What are we doing to help congregations function in healthy ways?
• Why aren't we holding churches more accountable when they mistreat their leaders?
• What can we do to help our churches explore new and better models for pastoral compensation?

We need to pray for those around us who are hurting. We also need to get involved providing support and working proactively to change our structures for the sake of our leaders.

 

Survey of Goals and Values

You probably thought I dropped off the face of the earth! As previously mentioned my personal life has been very hectic lately with moving, and over the past week or so I took a much needed vacation. I hope over the next few weeks to share some of my reflections that emerged during this time.

 

While checking through my bursting inbox I discovered a survey from Chruch of God Ministries on "Goals and Values". While not explicitly stated, it appears that only pastors are being invited to participate in this survey, with the results to be shared at the Strategic Planning Conference in August in Nashville (which I am planning to attend and hopefully provide daily blog updates).

 

I sincerely appreciate the opportunity to provide feedback and contribute to the formation of data that can help our movement understand itself. If you have received a survey invitation I encourage you to complete it.

 

My only frustration is that the survey itself is not put together very well (which, unfortunately, is far too common among surveys). Some of the questions are worded in a convoluted manner (e.g. #15 and #19) or provide narrow response choices (e.g. #12), and #17 in the online version isn't setup correctly (i.e. if you accidentally make a choice you can't change it! - so be careful). Also, apart from an open ended response opportunity on the bottom that allows us to share our pet concerns, I think there are many other questions that could have been asked on such topics as movement health, theology, and leadership issues.

 

Nevertheless, I look forward to eventually seeing the results and discussing them on this blog.

Better days at Warner Press

Life has been extremely busy for me the past few weeks. In addition to the extra demands surrounding Easter, our family has been moving to another house. And that has left little room for acitivities like blogging.

 

I came across an article at Christianity Today on "The 40 Best Christian Places to Work". The whole topic seems somewhat goofy and off the mark in terms of what we should be really focusing on. Nevertheless, what caught my attention is the fact that Warner Press is listed as one of the best Christian places to work (actually #2 in the category "Media (100 or fewer employees)").

 

Seeing Warner Press on this list is significant because it may indicate that things may have turned around at our publishing house. If you've been around the Church of God for awhile you are well aware that Warner Press has gone through some very trying times in the last 20 years. There have been critical financial struggles, and major changes in business focus and management. I'm sure that employee morale during much of this time has been less than positive. This new list, which is based on actual surveys taken among employees, gives us some tangible evidence that the new direction at Warner Press may be firmly established and that the staff are onboard. The leaders who have brought the company through this transition need to be commended.

 

Now, if only Warner Press could build on this foundation and take a much more active role in providing important books and resources that will strengthen the church, and avoid getting side-tracked from the more trivial aspects of Christian publishing, despite the allure of greater profit. But, that's another topic for another day...

 

ONEvoice! observations

I recently received the April/May 2006 edition of ONEvoice! the bi-monthly magazine of the Church of God in North America. Here a few observations:

 

1. Ronald Duncan, in his one-page "FRONTline" column, addresses "Change in the Church of God". (Taken alongside Jeannette Flynn's recent ponderings, it sounds like this is a hot issue in the Anderson offices right now). While Duncan covers some predictable territory, there are a few noteworthy thoughts as starting points for honest reflection that hopefully can lead to change:

"Meaningful change happens when present reality is honestly acknowledged"

 

"We have ignored or shunned major problems because of our polity (governance)."

 

"We must address, with divine reflection, a tweaking of our polity in order to nurture the growth and maturation of the church. We have to find ways to confront and overcome corporate dysfunction. Led by the Holy Spirit, we have to find mentor leadership for the future. We have to find ways to carry out worldwide ministries to the dispossessed, disenfranchised, discouraged, and diseased. We have to find ways to work in the kingdom of God with all our brothers and sisters to confront evil."

 

Ronald V. Duncan, "Change in the Church of God", ONEvoice! April/May 2006, p. 6

2. Merle Strege tackles holiness in his heritage column, and correctly tries to get us to move beyond our individualistic, legalistic and moralistic orientation, and towards a mission focus. Strege reminds us that Warner and other pioneers believed that holiness is the prerequisite necessary to bring about unity, which ultimately is "the means by which nonbelievers would come to the knowledge that God had sent Christ into the world." The implications are that "such holiness will identify the church as a catalyst for reconciliation and mercy in the world rather than mark it as a community preoccupied with what Christians do not do." Merle Strege, "The experience of holiness", ONEvoice! April/May 2006, p. 27.

 

3. Obviously, we have some individuals in our movement who are prompting us to re-examine and our thinking and practice. That is encouraging. And, certainly there are congregations moving beyond status quo and engaging in outward focused ministry (for example, read the articles regarding First Church of God in Kokomo, IN, and Sixth Avenue Church of God in Decatur, AL). Exciting! But, notice the church news clips in the EXTRAvoice! insert. In almost every instance, the news being reported is on internal church accomplishments, like building programs, fundraising successes, and programs. Not to undermine these occasions for thanksgiving, but why so few reports of churches ministering in the world? I know that these 17 congregational reports provide a very small sampling of all that goes on in our 2000+ churches, but it makes me wonder if these might be an indication of the general culture within our movement. What do we really value? Have we lost our vision, passion and calling for holiness that can truly impact the world?

 

Pastor's Fellowship

In the past few weeks I received several mailings from "Pastors' Fellowship", a highly conservative segment of our movement that tends to be concentrated in the Midwest. They have been promoting their annual gathering in Winchester, Kentucky, and more recently mailed out their quarterly magazine, the Reformation Witness.

 

Reformation Witness, for those that have never seen it, is a peculiar oddity. Visually, it looks like a bad nightmare from 30 years ago, with atrocious design and amateurish layout. The articles are typically doctrinal proclamations, but rarely insightful.

 

In short, I don't "get" Pastors' Fellowship.

 

My intent is not to unnecessarily criticize Pastors' Fellowship. I'm sure there are many fine individuals among their numbers, and someday I'd love to visit Winchester and observe first-hand what goes on there. (Anyone want to underwrite this fledgling blogger?).

 

I am also a firm believer that diversity should be welcome within the Church of God. There is room for ultra-conservatives, pacifists, African-Americans, Hispanics, emergents, liberals, etc.

 

The real difficulty I have with Pastors' Fellowship (or any other similar faction) is the implied attitude of superiority that is often projected. My observation of this group in particular is that they believe themselves to be the true guardians of the reformation movement, and that "Anderson" does not quite live up to their high conservative standard. Hence the need for separate gatherings, publications, and organization.

 

What is needed in the Church of God is healthy dialogue among all segments of our constituency. What concerns me is that all of our regional, cultural, racial, linguistic and theological divisions have tended to keep us from understanding each other. We have tended to hide in our cloistered corners, afraid of engaging with one another. And Church of God Ministries, conscious of these sensitivities, has often walked with excessive caution in this political minefield, afraid to provide the leadership necessary to move us out of this crippling environment. (A big hint for Jeannette Flynn as she discusses transforming our internal culture).  

 

If we are ever to find meaningful ways to express important teachings (like holiness) and engage in critical mission, we must all come to the Table and table. We must start practicing the unity we so vigorously preach.

 

Holiness Manifesto

Last month the Wesleyan Holiness Study Project, a consortium of leaders from ten holiness denominations (including the Church of God) released a "Holiness Manifesto" as part of a goal to articulate "a contemporary statement of holiness for the future mission of the Church".

 

I encourage you to read the Manifesto, further blog reflections at CHOG Migration, and an article at Christianity Today.

 

There is no need for me to summarize the key points, but I want to make a few observations and comments:

 

1. I am encouraged to see our participation in this project. Not only do we have something to contribute, but also much to learn from others.

2. The Manifesto is one of the finest statements of holiness that I have read. While it may not satisfy those looking for an exhaustive doctrinal treatise, the Manifesto affirms holiness and states it in a fresh manner that is relevant for our time and the issues we face.

3. There is deliberate effort to correct the abuses and misconceptions often associated with holiness. For example: "Holy people are not legalistic or judgmental. The do not pursue an exclusive, private state of being better than others. Holiness is not flawlessness but the fulfillment of God's intention for us."

4. Most impressive for me is the link of holiness with mission and even the stewardship of creation. This truly takes holiness beyond its individualistic and moralistic excesses, and places it in the proper context of Jesus' message.

5. As significant as this Manifesto is, how will this impact our broader constituency within the Church of God? If this is just another lofty statement created by theologians and administrators it will die a death along with many other ideals. I would hope that it would provide a springboard for discussion within our own movement, especially at the level of local congregations. Are we prepared to enter into a new dialogue concerning holiness and its meaning for our world, or we will be content to simply regurgitate previously stated abstractions?

 

Pastor raises controversy

Brent Waldemarsen, Pastor of Harvest Community Church (of God), in Willmar, Minnesota is in the middle of a state-wide controversy.

 

While I do not know the individuals involved or situation first-hand there are a number of news reports that give us a good indication of what's going on. Apparently, Waldemarsen attended a meeting of a local ministerial association (of which he is not a member) and secretly taped the state Senate Majority Leader, Dean Johnson, who was speaking. Johnson made some comments regarding gay marriage that inappropriately implied a close relationship with Minnesota Supreme Court judges. Waldemarsen's tape quickly got into the hands of Minnesota for Marriage, an activist organization. Various media have picked up the audio and transcripts of the speech and expanded it into a full-blown controversy.

 

The whole gay marriage issue is a hot potato to begin with, but now with this development the various sides on this issue have become even more inflamed than ever. Advocates of traditional marriage are upset with the senator and his comments. Those supporting gay marriage believe that Waldemarsen's tactics were immoral, if not illegal.

 

Without getting into the whole gay marriage issue, this problem illustrates a much deeper dilemma: To what extent do we get involved in political issues around us? I know that these issues touch people at their deepest convictions, and that many well-intentioned Christians and church leaders believe that their involvement is necessary for the sake of society.

 

I wonder, however, if in getting involved in the politics around us in the name of the church there is a real danger of our proclamation of the Good News of Jesus being hampered and thwarted? Instead of witness and mission based on Jesus-modeled servanthood, we can easily sell out to the power games and systems of the world and in the process confirm to the world the spiritual bankruptcy of the church.

 

This is a discussion that rarely happens in our circles, at least in a thorough and constructive manner. I hope that we will not shy away from struggling with an understanding and practice that reflects our holiness-oriented faith and practice.

 

Some web links covering and commenting on this story:

http://www.kstp.com/article/pstories/s14909.html

http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?ID=22868

http://wcco.com/local/local_story_076074439.html

http://www.burtonhanson.com/

http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities/news/editorial/14161973.htm

 

Transformational Change?

I was excited to see the latest copy of Communion arrive in my mailbox. In particular, I wanted to read the second installment of Jeannette Flynn's discussion on "How do you change a culture?". Upon closer examination, however, my enthusiasm turned to disappointment. (My previous postings related to this discussion can be found here: "Change of Culture", and "Our Culture (version 1.0)"

Don't get me wrong. I respect Jeannette, she has profound things to say, and I believe that this is a valuable discussion. But, the process is driving me crazy.

First, this discussion is taking an extremely long time. One article every two months is hardly sufficient. Healthy discussion cannot be protracted like this.

Yes, Jeannette has started a blog (http://transformationalchange.chog.org), which could provide some valuable interchange. But, even here is only one post going back to December. I hope she contributes on a regular basis. (By the way, this marks the first RSS feed on the Church of God Ministries website - a welcome advancement. But, there's still some bugs to work out, as the feed doesn't appear to be working properly).

I affirm Flynn's assertion that "the issues are critical and the time is paramount". Let's get the discussion going and work for transformational change!

Raise the flag?

I may be treading on sacred ground here, but ...

 

Like most pastors I recently received my 2006 Resource Catalog from Warner Press. As a "good" Church of God minister I dutifully flipped through to check out what is new. I was especially interested to see some of the new books that will be published in coming months, including Are You Sure You're Right? by Jerry Hickson, What's Right with the Church of God by Thomas Pelt, and Preaching the Story by fellow Central Californian, Jeffrey Frymire. (I will review these books on this blog once they are available and I have read them).

 

So far so good. But, moving a little further along in the catalog my enthusiasm quickly waned. On page 14 staring me in the face is the Church of God flag. I don't know if this is a new item for sale, but it's the first time I've noticed it. And it just seemed to stand out like a sore thumb, complete with our dated and tired logo, albeit modified. The flag is available in handsewn cloth for $135.00, or nylon for only $55.00. (Shipping and sales tax extra. Call now - operators are standing by ...)

 

Don't get me wrong. I'm not against a Church of God visual identity (although a new logo would be welcome!) or even a flag, I suppose (although I couldn't imagine buying one). What troubles me, however, is how it seems that our identity often is limited to such shallow representations. More than not our self-understanding tends to be wrapped up in clichés, nostalgic sentimentality and even trinkets. Buying and flying a flag is not going to strengthen our identity.

 

If salvation, unity and holiness are our "core truths" (as the catalog description states), how do we really express these meaningfully in our collective proclamations and expressions? What difference are they making in our mission within the world? I would hope that we would become devoted to struggling with these issues, as this will have the greatest impact on our movement and ministry.

 

Getting People to Serve

From time to time I have highlighted the increased awareness among many of us concerning the mission of the church as it relates to service. This has become a more prevelant topic in the Church of God especially since last year's North American Convention.

 

One of the greatest challenges that our congregations face in transitioning emphasis to mission and service is finding practical ways to implement it within their settings. I just came across an excellent report published by Leadership Network. On their website they have a summary article, "Transforming Volunteers into Kingdom Laborers", but more importantly download and read the  full report at no cost.

 

Definitely worth reading and acting upon.

 

Troubles in Cuba

A story has appeared in Compass Direct (News of Christians worldwide who are persecuted for their faith) about a former (?) Church of God leader in Cuba who was arrested by authorities. While I have no way of knowing all the details of the accusations or what's behind some of the strife in the church there, it is a matter that deserves our prayers. Ministering in a country like Cuba must be difficult enough then to have to deal with some of the internal and external politics facing the church.

 

LINK

 

The confusion over holiness

While I am not a big George Barna fan, I was intrigued to read his recent findings of Americans' understanding of holiness. In his summary, "The Concept of Holiness Baffles Most Americans", Barna observed that many Christians "do not understand the concept or significance of holiness, do not personally desire to be holy, and therefore do little, if anything to pursue it."

 

Of course, we in the Church of God sit back smugly in our chairs because holiness is one of our key tenets. There is no confusion in our camps over holiness. Or is there?

 

While I do not have Barna's resources to conduct a comprehensive survey within our own movement, my observation is that most of the people in our congregations are not clear on the topic. We claim to preach it, but there has been so much moralistic and legalistic baggage attached to our practice of it that I am convinced we are also baffled.

 

Holiness is an important teaching and practice, and we who believe in its significance should be working hard to restate it to a church community and world that do not seem to fully understand it. To do so we must be willing to move beyond the simplistic descriptions that we have previously provided and present fresh interpretations that speak directly to the hearts and minds of people today, all the while capturing the intent of Scripture. For example, there is much to be said about framing holiness within the context of our participation in God's mission.

 

What is your take on the confusion over holiness?

 

The Church of God Reformation Movement: the emerging church of the late 1800's?

My blogging has been sparse over the past couple of weeks, but I came across an article that I couldn't but help pass on without delay.

 

Those of you following the emergent movement may read TheOOZE, a website devoted to encouraging "the Church to engage our emerging culture by developing relationships and resources". I was not aware until just now that the general editor, Alan Hartung, has deep Church of God roots.

 

Hartung wrote an article that compares the genesis of the Church of God Reformation Movement with the emergent movement. This is a must read article, as it provides valuable insights from someone who understands our movement, who now stands outside of it, and who has many insights on church movements including our own. ARTICLE LINK.

 

A key quote:

 

The Church of God reformation movement began with the power of God’s Spirit and a vision from God birthed in the hearts of a few that spread to many. The emerging church began in the same way. We are as much captives to our era as they were to theirs, and we will not be able to see everything coming. But we can learn from the mistakes of our godly predecessors, the body of Christ before we were, and seek to stay on the path of God’s vision for the Church.

 

It's good we have contributed so much to the larger church through our "mistakes"! :)

 

Blogging and news updates

I want to share some of my personal thoughts concerning the direction of this blog. As my blog description says, my intent is to provoke "constructive discussion related to our theology and mission, within broad contexts". As a result I will engage in a number of topics, with the hope that you will leave comments as part of the dialogue.

 

Blogging is a a relatively new medium, and most people do not even understand it, let alone make effective use of them. In the evolution (can I use that word?) of this technology it is emerging as an powerful means for disseminating information and for creating decentralized networks of discussion.

 

This blog is devoted to Church of God issues, and the only one that I know of that has this precise focus. Certainly, as my blogroll reveals, there are many other Church of God bloggers, but many of these blogs are more personal or have a very narrow purpose. From time to time I will reference those postings that seem to contribute to the Church of God discussion that I am leading here.

 

One of the areas that I have struggled with is passing along Church of God news items that may not be passed on through the normal and "official" channels. I don't want to bore anyone with the details of every WCG bake sale, etc. but occasionally I mine news stories that may be of general interest to this readership. This is a new, powerful role that blogs are doing to fill the gap not met by traditional media or communications.

 

My goal, however, is not only to avoid trivia, but also to refrain from gossip. In the interests of the privacy and dignity of individuals it is important to exercise discretion. There are times, however, when news stories are of interest to Church of God members and leaders, even if their content is less than inspiring or positive. I may pass some of these on, if only to remind us of the realities that exist within our movement (and that some of them are not pretty). Hopefully, we will respond with prayer and reflection, and with the intent of restoring people and relationships.

 

For example, last week I provided an update of a settlement in the Church Extension fiasco.

 

Today, I learned of a court resolution regarding Forrest Robinson, a former president of Mid-America Christian University. For those interested you can read more at the Lexington Herald-Leader.

 

As always, your feedback on these issues and how I handle them are always welcome.

 

Our Culture (version 1.0)

In a recent post, "Change of Culture", I highlighted the discussion that Jeannette Flynn has begun concerning cultural change within the Church of God.

 

While we still await the start of her own blog and her future articles in Communion, I am anxious to begin the discussion here. And, probably the best way to start is by describing our culture as it currently expresses itself.

 

The whole question of culture can be highly abstract and academic. Let's leave it up to anthropologists and sociologists to define the concept, but I think it is still reasonable for us to list a number of traits and influences of our movement that generally describe our common experiences and expressions in North America. Here's my quick list:

 

Midwest-centered. Historically and geographically the Church of God finds its roots and strength in the Midwestern United States. This influences our perspectives and values across the continent.

 

Rural-oriented. While the urbanization and suburbanization of our movement has been increasing, we have tended to function better within smaller towns and cities.

 

Fellowship-driven. Rallying around our self-identity, we enjoy and take advantage of our sense of community, even at the expense of effectively engaging in mission within the larger society. Larger events such as campmeetings have contributed in a major way to our cohesion, although in recent years many of these have struggled.

 

Evangelical influence. Our Wesleyan roots certainly make us small "e" evangelical with emphases on conversion, experience and action, but we find significant (albeit uncomfortable and confused at times) affinity with American big "E" Evangelicalism, with its social and political conservatism and Calvinistic leanings.

 

Fractured homogeneities. The Church of God has significant and growing non-white/Anglo constituencies (i.e. African American and Hispanic), but the integration of our diversity is not a value that we easily practice.

 

Independent. We live in tension between our close affinity with Evangelicalism (see above) and our deviant distinctives. For example, the ordination of women, amillenial eschatalogy, and anti-denominationalism make us stand out in obvious ways from other conservative Christians. Our refusal to join ecumenical groups confirms the external perception that we "have a mind of our own" (a la the famous Saturday Evening Post article of a couple of decades ago). Overall, we just find it difficult to "fit" in with other Christians.

 

Reluctant of leadership. We began under strong, if not charismatic, leaders, but since the formative years have struggled with issues of leadership, vision and accountability.

 

That's my initial cultural description of the Church of God. I'm sure there are better ways to state some of these points, and there may be obvious things I have missed. This is a list still in process. I value your feedback.

 

Church of God and the Environment

Today a group of influential conservative Christian leaders issued a statement, "Climate Change: An Evangelical Call to Action" (see Evangelical Climate Initiative). The statement expresses a biblical conviction of environmental responsibility, and calls for action to address climate change. The news media has been picking up on this story, especially since it involves a position that is not typical of conservative Christians. The 85 signatories include many prominent Christian leaders (including Leith Anderson, Jack Hayford, Brian McLaren, Rick Warren, and our own Jay Barber - President of Warner Pacific College), but has already generated controversy with the rejection of the statement by other conservatives such as James Dobson.

 

Despite the political and scientific arguments pro and con against this position, it is impressive to see this segment of Christianity taking environmental stewardship seriously.

 

I am concerned, however, that in the Church of God we typically have adopted a very narrow view towards stewardship, being virtually silent on broader issues such as the environment. I remember awhile back looking through many of our doctrinal and theological books trying to find discussions on the environment. I was shocked and frustrated not to find a single significant statement by any Church of God author or theologian. Many writers address creation, but get caught up in the tired, old modernistic debates over creation versus evolution.

 

Thank you Jay Barber for boldly going against the norm, and reminding us in the Church of God of some of the broader issues of Scripture and holiness.

 

Change of Culture

In the January-February 2006 Communion newsletter recently mailed to ministers, Congregational Ministries Team Leader, Jeannette Flynn, asks the question: How do you change a culture? If you haven't already read her front page article, "Do We Need a Change of Culture?", I encourage you to do so.

 

Flynn honestly looks out across the church (both outside and inside our movement) and sees some disturbing trends, including pastors struggling and leaving ministry, and more churches closing than being planted. While this article is only Part One of an on-going series, she already suggests that the problem is rooted in our culture.

 

I was impressed to read this emphasis on culture. Admittedly, "culture" is a difficult thing to pin down, and can be easily relegated to an abstract description with little relevance. Yet, within the Church of God we have avoided this type of discussion that probes into the underlying theological and social factors that guide and express our corporate life. Apart from denial, other attempts to address our problems have been limited to providing simplistic answers and spiritualizing rationalizations.

 

Jeannette posed a number of important questions. For the benefit of all of us, here they are:

• How do you change a culture?
• What is a culture?
• Does the Church of God reformation movement have a culture?
• How do we know when you need to actually change a culture versus just changing some practices or inserting some new concepts?
• Where do you start if you're going to change a culture?
• Where does the responsibility for a changing a culture really lie?
• Can one person really have any influence on changing a culture?
• Are there pitfalls to avoid or nonnegotiables that must be engaged?

I will make some attempts at these questions in the coming days. I'd also love to hear from many of you out there.

 

It was encouraging to read that Jeannette is planning on starting her own blog to further this discussion. We welcome her participation in the blogosphere. Until then let's begin the dialogue!

 

Church Extension in the news

For more information on developments in the settlement of the Church Extension fiasco, check out this news article in the Indianapolis Business Journal: "Directors dangling $5M deal".

 

Blogging

It's been awhile (over two weeks to be truthful!) since I've posted to this blog. I've wanted to on several occasions, but life has been tugging at me from a number of directions for the past few weeks and blogging had to be set aside for a bit. I hope by next week to share some recent thoughts and reflections that have been coming my way.

 

Talking about blogging, be sure to check out the growing "blogrolls", listed on my main page. I am a strong proponent of blogging, and therefore I want to maintain the most exhaustive list possible of

Church of God blogs, bloggers, feeds, and podcasts. Be sure to check these out, as you may find a few that would be worth subscribing to.

 

Hopefully you are "subscribing" to CHOGBlog and not just visiting the main web page to read my posts. Blogging is much more than a forum for individuals to rant, but the technology behind it allows readers to more effectively keep up with a number of blogs, thereby increasing interaction and exchange. If you are not already using a feed reader to automatically retrieve blogs and other feeds I urge you to find one that works well for you. There are three major types: Browser-integrated (e.g. Firefox with the Sage Extension), Stand-alone program (e.g. RSS Bandit), and Web-based (e.g. Bloglines, Newsgator, Google, or even My Yahoo!). I personally find web-based readers to be the most effective since they are not limited to any one computer.

 

Let's keep dialog alive within the Church of God. Blogs can be one of the most significant ways for us to learn from others and to engage in healthy discussions that ultimately will strengthen us all as we strive to carry out God's mission.

 

More Yearbook reflections

Last week I pointed out the shifting geographic trends that are apparent from studying the 2006 Church of God Yearbook. Since then, I have also been reflecting on the type of data collected and published in our annual.

 

My question is: How can we better quantify church effectiveness than by just "AM attendance"?

 

I touched on this issue a few months back ("How do we meaure success?"), but I want to approach it from a slightly different angle this time. Certainly, measuring congregational size has become an unhealthy preoccupation today, as the explicit and implict assumption is that the bigger the church, the better the church. That's not a necessarily true relationship.

 

But, apart from using size to compare churches, even using AM attendance itself is a problem. Certainly, measuring the number of people present at our Sunday service(s) provides a tangible reference point, but I believe it is an increasingly meaningless indicator of true church life and activity. Why have we settled for attendance at our weekly gathering of celebration and preaching as the best way to evaluate our life? Obviously, counting warm bodies on Sunday mornings is easy, and other things are more difficult to quantify. For example, up until a few years ago a "membership" number was also included in the Yearbook, but since we don't have a consistent method to determine measurement within our theology and polity, it is a fairly useless statistic.

 

Perhaps the whole practice of "measuring" is the problem. Shouldn't we be more concerned about being "faithful" than trying to quantify our activities? Sure, I understand the argument that measurements are a valuable tool to help us objectively assess our effectiveness. That is true to point. Maybe it is what we are measuring that needs to change.

 

While this will hardly satisfy those obsessed with the need for accurate statistical data, I would be more interested to measure some of the following congregational markers:

 

1. Number of people actively involved in cell-groups, as this is probably a better indicator of church life.

2. Number of people we are touching in our community through our intentional contacts and service projects.

3. Number of baptisms.

 

This is my start for a list. I'd love to hear from those of you reading this blog. How can we best measure congregational life, activity, and effectiveness?

 

Geographic shifts

I received my copy of the 2006 Yearbook of the Church of Godtoday.

 

As usual I made sure that my name and congregation were listed (and correctly). Once my fears were relieved I spent a few minutes glancing at various sections, looking up old friends, etc.

 

One of the most interesting observations I made was on the North American Summary (pp. 368f). For the first time ever, California has surpassed Indiana in "AM Attendance" for the number two spot (Ohio still has a commanding lead), although Indiana still has 19 more congregations than California. 

 

While I don't want to get hung up on church statistics, something significant is happening here. While the midwest is still the geographic hub of our movement in North America (36% of AM attendance is centered in the five states of OH, IN, MI, KY, and IL), there is a trend of growth in states on the fringes. For example, above average growth is occuring in California, Washington, and Florida, whereas the five "hub" states showed virtually no cumulative growth, with three of the five actually declining from the previous year's statistics. There are other apparent differences too. California, for instance, has roughly half the total Sunday evening and Sunday School attendances of Indiana, but over twice the number listed as "Saved". What is most interesting is that the west coast in particular is known as highly secularized and less religious.

 

One shouldn't draw too many conclusions from these statistics, as these numbers only provide a snapshot (and not a comprehensive one) of what is really happening. But, they certainly illustrate some interesting trends and provide material for further reflection.

 

Church on the roll?

Happy New Year!

 

I couldn't resist on this one ...

 

First Church of God in Pendleton, Oregon has come up with a unique fundraiser: Selling toilet paper!

 

Read the article in the East Oregonian newspaper.

 

Holiday thoughts

I trust that everyone had a good Christmas, and that the spirit of the Holidays is still alive in you. I haven't blogged much lately, as there were other priorities to tend to during this season.

 

This year in particular, because Christmas Day fell on a Sunday, there was a vigorous debate about the role that Christmas plays within our society. Many Christians are feeling threatened by the prevailing influences that are turning our celebration into a purely secular one. Some churches, almost resigning to this reality, even cancelled their Sunday morning services. (Side note: Much to even my surprise, our attendance on Christmas morning exceeded our average and my own pessimistic expectations).

 

Talking about holidays, I came across an interesting article from the Washington Post and reproduced at a blog called BadGals-Radio.com. The article concerns the meaning of Kwanzaa within the African American community, and deals with the conflict that it poses to Christians who see it conflicting with Christmas. My interest in this article is because of their quote from one of the most well-known Church of God figures outside of our movement, Cheryl Sanders. While I encourage you to read the entire article, here is the excerpt pertaining to Sander's comments:

Ministers and churchgoers described Kwanzaa as having moved beyond the politics of its roots, which date to a time when some American blacks saw Christmas and Christianity as having a decidedly white, European pedigree. Today, Kwanzaa, with its rituals and explicit focus on values, seems nothing if not spiritual.

“To me, the only thing that makes spirituality comprehensible is the ethical values it affirms,” said the Rev. Cheryl Sanders, senior pastor at Third Street Church of God in the District and a professor of African American spirituality at Howard University’s Divinity School. She leads her church in marking Kwanzaa by lighting candles, inviting the choir and congregants to dress in Afrocentric garb and discussing from the altar the holiday’s principles: unity, self-determination, shared responsibility, cooperative economics, purpose, creativity and faith.

Those principles resonate today, Sanders says, after the baby boom era of abandoning traditional ideals. “Kwanzaa is an example of a way to recover the intergenerational dialogue around values,” she said.

These examples further illustrate that we all face many challenges as we strive to proclaim and practice a meaningful faith in an increasingly irreligious culture.

Worship as holiness

To follow-up on some of my recent postings concerning worship I want to reconsider our theology and practice of worship, especially as it relates to us in the Church of God. 
 
First, let me say that I affirm the importance of worship. Without question, our worship of God is paramount. My issue, however, is not whether worship is important; but whether our current understanding and practice of worship is an accurate reflection of biblical theology. 
 
I sincerely believe, speaking from a Church of God / holiness perspective, that we have lost the intent of worship and have settled for the popularized notions that have overtaken the majority of Christianity.
 
Despite idyllic statements and convictions to the contrary, when most people in our churches are talking about worship they are referring to the ritual of worship that has become part of most of Christianity, or about the experience of worship that is more reflective of the pentecostal/charismatic movements. Sure, almost everyone would agree that there is more to worship than these descriptions, but in practice these are what it usually boils down to.
 
Historically, the Church of God has not understood worship in either of these ways. From our holiness background worship was primarily understood as living the holy life. It is a matter of practice and of lifestyle, reflecting the inner presence and work of the Holy Spirit. This was understood to be the biblical teaching as reflected in key scriptures such as Romans 12:1 or John 4:21-23. This theological perspective explains why early Church of God gatherings (i.e. church services, campmeetings, etc.) emphasized God's presence and working in the lives of the saints, and were not "God-centered" in the sense promoted in current worship theology (although the pioneers would have argued that they were in fact "God-centered" because they expressed God's work in and through their lives). A study of early Church of God songs certainly reflects this perspective.
 
Over time, our movement became less isolated and interacted more with other Christians. Merle Strege, in I Saw the Church, describes how the evolution of our hymnal is a good example of how we began to enter the mainstream of Christianity. Besides our core songs of testimony we took on a wider range of hymnological genre, including traditional hymns of worship and adoration to God. The current contemporary praise and worship movement has propelled us even further along this path. We like what we see in other churches (perhaps sometimes out of covetousness), and are eager to implement this worship emphasis in our churches.
 
Am I suggesting that other forms or perspectives of worship are wrong or invalid? No. In fact, one could argue that our past isolation and resistance to learn from other groups has been a great weakness. We should and can learn from other groups who follow Christ. And, I personally love some of the new worship music, and find it to be an excellent vehicle for expressing my love and adoration to God.
 
But, I come back to our holiness perspective on worship. I believe that we have substituted worship tradition and experience for worship that should be expressed through our lives, 24/7.
 
Ask most people within Church of God congregations what comes to mind when they think of "worship" and the response is the "Worship Service" on Sunday mornings. Yes, this can be and usually is a form of our worship to God, and is especially significant as a corporate expression. But, unfortunately, this has become a narrow, popular view not reflecting the full biblical teaching .
 
The fact that the Church of God is not immune from the "worship wars" prevalent in contemporary Christendom, is an indication that we have lost our emphasis and settled for more limited worship perspectives. Again, we know better, but our practice rarely reflects it.
 
In practical terms, what does all this mean? It speaks to the need for sound theological teaching concerning worship. I am disappointed to see that even recent attempts within the Church of God have simply been regurgitations of current evangelical theology that do not fully embrace our holiness perspective. Yes, let's encourage meaningful expressions of corporate worship and private devotion, but more importantly let's promote the full meaning of worship which is demonstrated through all aspects of our lives, including our mission in the world. What the world needs to see is not better worship in church services, but better worship expressed in the lives of Christ's followers.
 
Questions for us to ask, might include: What language do we use to describe worship? What hidden messages do we send when we call our church service a "worship service"? Should we be designating "worship leaders" or "Ministers of Worship" based simply on their role in the Sunday service? How should we describe worship as holiness for people in our churches? How might our church gatherings and activities be different if we taught and believed a more comprehensive worship? How do we teach holiness to our postmodern generations?
 
We move towards a correct approach to worship in our churches once we are free to use holiness terminology to describe worship and we are freed from the skewed belief that the Sunday morning service is the center of our worship.
 
Our world needs to see followers of Christ who understand and practice a holistic worship of God. As a holiness movement, the Church of God has the opportunity to be a voice for this biblical perspective.
 
Or do we have trouble today even articulating what holiness is? That's another topic for another day ...

Worship in the Church of God - history

Within the last week I have written a couple of posts ("Advent, worship, creeds and the Church of God", and "Rick Warren's Creed") that were prompted by my observations concerning Advent and a lectionary-driven church calendar. In many church traditions worship has played a teaching role, retelling the gospel story through worship liturgy, supplemented by preaching. Certainly worship is not the only way this is being done. Creeds have been used for the same purpose, as has Sunday School curriculum. Even Rick Warren's Purpose Driven Life has filled that role in an Evangelical church climate that seems to be lacking in its ability to provide a comprehensive framework for its constituents.

 

I want to go back to the whole issue of worship. In a future post I want to present a fresh perspective of worship that is more in keeping with Scripture and our theological perspective. But, first let's examine worship in the Church of God from a historical perspective.

 

Anderson School of Theology Professor Emeritus and Archivist, Douglas E. Welch, in an article in the Church of God Historian (Vol. 4 No. 3) notes that there is virtually no discussion on the philosophy and theology of worship among our pioneers. They "did not talk about worship, they simple did it" (emphasis mine). References to worship in early writings suggested that it was

generally impromtu, unstructured, and charismatic. This involved the spontaneous singing of hymns and spiritual songs, the giving of exhortations and testimonies from the participants, and extemporaneous sermons - often more than one and usually lengthy. ("Jottings", page 6)

In the subsequent years our movement has struggled to find its way concerning worship. While generally rejecting formalism, we gradually adopted worship practices of other Christian groups around us. Since we rarely approached worship with intentionality, the result has been a wide diversity of worship theology, philosophy, and practices across our churches.

 

It is interesting to note (cf. Communion, Nov-Dec 2005, Vol. 6 No. 3) that a "Society for Church of God Worship" is being formed to discuss and strengthen worship across our movement. Obviously, years of wandering around the worship wilderness is leaving many looking for more. And, the worship "wars" of recent years have left many feeling battered. While I applaud the opportunities for dialogue on this topic, I am increasingly becoming concerned that we may be missing the true point of worship. More on that in a few days.

Involved in Toledo

Back in October I posted a few messages that considered the extent to which we should get involved in social issues in our communities (Churches on Mission, To what extent should we get involved?, Another example, and Born-again restaurant). One of the examples cited concerned Church of God pastor Mansour Bey organizing a protest against a neo-Nazi demonstration in Toledo, Ohio.

 

You may be interested to know that neo-Nazis are planning to be back in Toledo this Saturday. Pastor Bey is once again involved, this time to help organize a prayer vigil. LINK to blog story.

 

Please pray for them as they work to bring peace and understanding in their community.

Rick Warren's Creed

Friday evening my wife and I had the pleasure to attend the Central California Association's Pastors' and Spouses' Christmas Dinner. Put a group of pastors together in the same room (even during a social gathering) and before long the conversation turns to "shop talk".

 

Among other things, we had an interesting discussion that fit in well to my last blog post ("Advent, worship, creeds, and the Church of God"). We spent time trying to analyze why Rick Warren's Purpose Driven Life (and the accompanying "40 Days of Purpose", etc.)  have become so popular in many of our churches.

 

Our preliminary conclusion was that the Purpose Driven Life provides a simple framework for people to understand and live their faith. Warren's five purposes are not new, novel or even a complete doctrinal statement, but they provide a coherent way for people to make sense of being a follower of Jesus.

 

I have to admit that I'm not a big "Purpose Driven Life" fan or Rick Warren follower. But, I acknowledge that much of his apparent success at Saddleback and now around the world is in his exceptional gift to state the message of Jesus in a straightforward, simple, and comprehensive manner. The book and programs are certainly meeting a need among today's Christians who have had trouble bringing their fragmented faith together. In many ways, Warren's purposes have become a new creed for many people.

 

I'm not convinced, however, that the popularity of PDL will be sustainable. Once we have been "purposed" ad nauseum we will be looking for something more. Ultimately, it should lead us back to the quest for an on-going and organic church life and worship that leads to a fuller faith and discipleship.

 

More on this in coming days.

 

Advent, worship, creeds and the Church of God

There hasn't been much time for blogging in recent weeks, but in coming days I want to share some reflections that I have been having concerning "worship" in the Church of God.

 

This past Sunday marked the beginning of Advent. My suspicion is that few Church of God congregations noted this start to the church calendar, apart from the lighting of an advent candle or using some materials to begin promotion of the Christ's Birthday Observance offering.

 

Not that this should be surprising. The heritage and theology of the Church of God does not reflect a "high church" orientation to worship, with its lectionary and more elaborate rituals. If anything, we have resisted these forms of church, perceiving them as far removed from the simplicity of New Testament church life and more a product of Babylon.

 

I'm not convinced that adopting more formal worship and the lectionary are necessarily the best things for us to do, but I am concerned that in our rejection of these practices we have left a vacuum in helping our people understand and experience the story of Jesus and the Gospel. Let me explain.

 

As a pastor I am increasingly concerned that our churches are generally doing a poor job of providing our people with a comprehensive framework of faith. Sure we claim to be delivering sound biblical preaching, and we provide our members with Sunday School classes, bible studies and various resources. But, what is missing is an over-arching strategy that draws these components together into a coherent whole. Our congregations are exposed to the fine details of the Bible and doctrine, but typically these elements are fragmented and rarely brought together so that people see the "big picture" of Scripture.

 

Historically, the Christian church developed a number of effective tools to keep this larger view of the Gospel story before people. The church calendar and the lectionary is an excellent example. Every year, the congregation journeyed through the story and teachings of Jesus following a set pattern of Advent, Christmas, Epiphany, Lent, Passion, Easter, and Pentecost. Christians very quickly fell into this rhythm, and were very much aware of the message of Scripture even before wide-spread literacy or Gutenberg's invention of the printing press. Everything that took place in the church building centered on this dramatic retelling of the story, including various worship rituals and even the stained-glass windows.

 

The Protestant Reformation was quick to point out the emptiness of some of these traditions. Sure, many Roman Catholics were simply going through the motions and were being misled by a church that had increasingly separated itself from the authority of Scripture. While some reformers continued to embrace many of these traditions, the recitation of creeds increasingly were seen as the best way to ensure that the congregants were getting the big picture. There was a movement away from engaging people with the story of Scripture, and towards a more rational understanding of its teachings.

 

The Church of God has resisted the formality of both rituals and creeds. But, in doing so, I believe that we have failed to find effective ways to bring a more wholistic understanding of our faith to our people.

 

Again, I don't believe that we should just blindly adopt these former practices of the Christian church, as is becoming the trend in some segments of today's church. But, we must begin by addressing the issue, and then honestly searching for appropriate ways to tell the story of Jesus in an on-going manner, with cultural relevance, and bringing a simple and coherent whole to the understanding and application of the Gospel.

 

I'd love to hear your comments on this, and to hear how you may be dealing with this in your congregation.

 

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?

Emergent discussion

The last week has been extra busy. Not much time for blogging!

 

There has been some excellent discussion taking place regarding the Church of God in relation to the "emerging church" movement. Some of you have left some excellent comments* (LINK), or have even contacted me personally on the matter. Other blogs are picking up the discussion, including "Message in a Bottle".

 

While I have several other topics that I hope to blog on in coming days, let's keep this discussion alive, as it is one that is necessary for us to grapple with.

 

*A Word to Blog Readers: I know blogging is a new technology for many of you. Some of you still haven't figured out even how to "subscribe" to blogs. Remember, however, that comments are an important aspect to blogging. If you come across a post of interest to you, be sure to check out the comments already left, and consider leaving one yourself. Unfortunately, there are no consistent standards for comment formatting, so a comments link does not usually show up when you read through your feed reading software. Be sure to click through to the original blog site to find the comment section.

Reformation movement and Emergent

Last week I had several posts (#1, #2, #3) pondering our status as a movement. In response, I received a number of very thoughtful comments. Thanks!

 

Before putting this subject aside for awhile, I want to address the relationship of the Church of God to the "emerging church" movement that is sweeping across the English-speaking world. I know that there are a significant number of individuals within the Church of God who find themselves resonating with Emergent, including many readers of my blog. For example, the ChOG Postmodern Thinktank blog regularly probes into this topic, and a number of other blogs frequently touch on emerging church issues.

 

It is apparent to me that the emerging church movement is far more than another programming fad to briefly appear in the North American church. Even researcher George Barna (who I'm not normally crazy over) recognizes the significance of this trend, and has published a new book, Revolution, that acknowledges the major shifts that are occuring, largely because of the Emergent perspectives and actions impacting the church across virtually all denominations. I tend to agree with Barna that we could be at the verge of one of the major spiritual turning points (i.e. Great Awakenings) in the history of the U.S. Despite what they may think in light of their growing political influence, Evangelical Christianity will likely not be the impetus for this revival as it is actually losing credibility and the ability to speak to our culture. Overall, modern versions of Christianity are quickly revealing their spiritual bankruptcy and a growing number of people are questioning their theological and methodological underpinings. A new movement of Jesus-followers is truly emerging out of the shambles of the modernistic church.

 

On the surface I am convinced that we in the Church of God are especially suspicious of other movements, mainly because we are still trying to come to terms with our own sense of movement. And, because a large proportion of our constituency has sold out to American Evangelicalism, we tend to share their insecurities and defensiveness when confronted by the challenges of the emerging church.

 

My question is: How open is the Church of God to the emerging church movement? Are we so fixated on our movement agenda of 125 years ago that we may miss the opportunities in new movements of God today? Or, will we capture a new vision of mission and our own identity within these opportunities? Certainly we should not renounce our own movement roots and aspirations, because we actually have much to contribute to the spiritual climate today. On the other hand, however, we should not blindly follow the emerging church movement without careful reflection and engagement.

 

I'd be interested to hear from many of you who are following these developments, to find out how you see our own movement fitting into this new, exciting moving of the Spirit.

 

Hurricane Relief

As time moves on it is easy for us removed from the devastation to forget the ongoing efforts to assist hurricane victims. I encourage you to keep up with http://katrinaadventure.blogspot.com, a blog recording the relief efforts of the Winton Road First Church of God in Fairfield, OH. It appears that they have made several relief trips to the Gulf Coast region. Another church active in mission!

 

(The same church also conducts regular trips to the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in South Dakota. The blog regarding that is at: http://www.pineridgemission.blogspot.com/)

 

Viewpoint recommendation

I encourage you to listen to the October 30th edition of Viewpoint. Jim Lyon interviews Ed Hyatt, a Church of God minister who has powerful personal story to tell. I know Ed well and am pleased to see Viewpoint giving an opportunity for his experiences to touch others.

 

To where are we "moving"?

I appreciate the comments that continue to come in on my posts this week on our "movement" status.

 

In the comments from yesterday's post, marlene and andy touched on an important theme: mission. Marlene reminded us that we were first and foremost a "reformation" movement and that mission was secondary. Andy pushed this a little further stating that "naming and identifying who we are ... is pointless", but "What does matter is changing the world we live in by the presence of God, via His Son and Spirit".

 

While arguing over the definition of what it means to be a "movement" is not that useful, we nonetheless need to come to terms with our identity, which, like it or not, is wrapped up in the cloak of being a reformation movement. Perhaps we need to demythologize this self-understanding before we are capable to move on to the mission to which we are ultimately called. But, even this does not have to preclude us from contributing from our unique perspective and distinctives.

 

The question we need to ask ourselves is: Are we prepared to accept a fresh call of God for this time and generation? We can celebrate the contribution of our reformation in the unique context in which our movement was formed, but our world has changed and the challenges facing the church are different. The need today is less that of bringing all Christians together, but more of reaching out to a world that has barely been exposed to the reality of the Good News. Are we ready to join in this movement which is already taking shape around us? Or, will we go off marching to the beat of our own drum?

 

More movement

Since my post on Monday regarding movement, I've had a few, but nevertheless very thought-provoking, comments left. Because of the significance of these contributions (and since I know that most people rarely read comments!) I want to continue the discussion in a main post.

 

BTW, you can read the comments from my last post at this LINK.

 

There was general agreement that we are not functioning as a movement. David said that "we have to put the 'Move' back in Movement", and this will happen because of the Holy Spirit. Mojclessme believes that we have too many smaller movements within the Church of God diverting us away from our primary purpose: to reach the lost. Randy is not optimistic that we will recover our sense of movement anytime soon.

 

Thanks for the good reflections, guys. (And, I'd love to hear from more of you - I know you are out there!)

 

While it is easy to become discouraged by our current state, I am convinced that there is hope. Let me briefly state a few reasons:

 

1. I see a small, but passionate, group of younger leaders emerging in the Church of God that are viewing our heritage and theology with fresh eyes. They need to be encouraged to have a larger voice.

 

2. Our sense of "movement" is ingrained within our DNA. As I stated in my last post, we can easily fool ourselves into thinking that we are still a movement. Of course, we must confront reality with honesty, and even repent of this illusion that blinds us. Once we admit our failures, however, we will be in a better position to recover our movement-hood.

 

3. There are major shifts taking place within the larger scope of Christianity, and these forces are of seismic proportions that will affect us whether we want them to or not. The question is: Will we allow this moving of the Spirit to move us? If we do, our movement orientation has the potential to significantly contribute to this broader movement.

 

"Movement"

A long-standing tension within the Church of God concerns our self-identification as a "movement" instead of as a denomination.

 

We all know how uncomfortable we feel when the "D" word comes up in our conversation. We refuse to use it to describe ourselves, and are often quick to correct others who want to label us with it.

 

My goal is not to create a debate as to whether or not we are a denomination. For all practical purposes we are. We have a defined brand name, we are organized as such, and, most signficantly, virtually everyone on the outside perceives that we are one. Sure, our polity, structure, and lack of formal creed make us a-less-than model "denomination". But, if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck then it is a duck!

 

I like the fact that we struggle with our sense of identity and purpose. On the one hand, our reluctance to give into denominationalism keeps the biblical ideal of the church high in our foreground. We recognize the value that a movement could have in the current, messed-up state of Christianity. On the other hand, however, we must be careful not to delude ourselves into believing that we are still functioning as a true movement, because if we are honest we will admit that we have lost our edge in this regard. (See my Post: "Where the Saints Have Trod").

 

In the upcoming days I will attempt to address some of the issues surrounding movements, including a look at how we are responding to other movements of God's Spirit in the church, such as in the Emergent movement. I'd love to hear your comments.

 

Born again restaurant

This has been an interesting week as far as news stories concerning Church of God congregations and their involvement within their communities.

 

According to WHAS in Louisville, Kentucky, Parkland Church of God has partnered with a Baptist Church to re-open a bankrupt restaurant in their community. One's first reaction might be: "Why would churches want to get into the restaurant business?" Their plans, however, are to give back to the community, which includes providing much needed jobs. (Story Link). From what I've been able to gather these churches are in a community that really needs hope, and they believe that this is one practical way to express the love of God.

 

Certainly a different twist on community and social involvement, and another case to add to my ongoing reflections. I would be interested to learn more about this project, and how the church sees this as part of their overall mission.

 

Another example

On the heels of yesterday's post, regarding Church of God Pastor Mansour Bey's involvement in the protests leading to the riots in Toledo, comes a news story from Monroe, Ohio. The Middletown Journal reports that First Church of God in Monroe hosted the National Coalition Against Legalized Gambling in preparation for an upcoming referendum regarding a proposed casino in the area. Pastor Terry Ball is active in the fight against the casino. (Story Link)

 

I'm sure these types of community involvements by Church of God congregations are quite common, as these are just two media covered examples from the last few days. I'm glad to see that there is involvement in real issues outside the walls of the local church.

 

My questions from yesterday still remain. As I reflect further on these recent examples I think part of my uneasiness is that we often get involved in these issues in a reactionary manner. That is, once it becomes a problem we go out and protest, and indicate that we are AGAINST something. Certainly there is a place for this. I believe, however, that if we are truly missional we will be salt and light in our communities at all times, even before we are prompted out of the comfort of our pews. In other words, in what ways do we communicate to the world that we are FOR something. Is it the "Good News" that we are known for?

 

I know that media reports don't tell the full story, and I have no first hand knowledge of what the two congregations in question have been doing before this. Nevertheless, these are considerations worthy of further pondering.

 

I'd love to hear from more of you on your experiences and reflections.

 

To what extent should we get involved?

On Saturday, Toledo, Ohio was rocked by a riot provoked by a small neo-Nazi group that came in contact with hundreds of African-American protesters. According to CNN/Time one of the organizers of the counter-protest was Church of God pastor Mansour Bey (Story Link).

 

I am the least qualifed person to analyze the genesis of the riots, or to dictate from a distance what should have or should not have happened. Truly, Neo-Nazis are bozos, and I can only imagine the frustration that African Americans feel when these clowns try to goad them on their own turf. On the other hand, this frustration is not justification for violent behavior.

 

The questions that I am confronted with are: As church leaders, to what extent should we get involved in hot social issues around us? At what point does our participation in a legitimate cause that identifies with the hurts and problems around us cross-over into a compromise of the church that turns us into a political movement?

 

The comingling of faith and politics has become a major problem in the U.S., and increasingly Christians are finding it difficult to know where those boundaries lie. With hot button issues like abortion and homosexuality, churches have often shot themselves in the foot by becoming so confrontational that they have lost the ability to proclaim the Good News of Jesus. On the flip side of the coin, however, we can find many examples throughout history (e.g. during Nazi Germany) when the church shamefully abdicated its role, and in effect, contributed to the sin around them.

 

So, what would I do if my own city was faced with an explosive issue? Would I/we sit idly by, leaving it to others to engage the enemies? Or, would I/we take a leadership position, even to the point of possibly being misunderstood?

 

I'd love to hear some of your thoughts on this issue.

 

UPDATE 10/18/05: You can listen to Pastor Bey's own description of what happened and his involvement on Pacifica Radio's "Democracy Now" show, archived online at: http://www.pacifica.org/programs/dn/051018.html. (TIP: Start listening at around 9:30). It is interesting to hear how his account differs from some of the implications in the CNN report.

Churches on mission

Many of my posts have been focused on mission. Mission has certainly become a new orientation of mine, as I am convinced that it must be at the core of who we are and how we define ourselves. Unfortunately, however, the business of "doing" church often gets in the way, distracting us into other directions.

 

I am encouraged to see that more and more churches are responding to the call to be missional, including Church of God congregations. It's important that we highlight and celebrate examples around us.

 

Today the Associated Press is distributing a story that quotes Paul Binion, Pastor of Westside Church of God in Fresno, California. Paul is a well-known figure in Fresno, working diligently to touch people in the poverty-stricken area around his church. He and his church are frequently in the local media spotlight, and Paul is highly regarded and consulted by local government officials. Now Paul is in a nationally-distributed story (e.g. in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer) because Fresno has been identified as having "the nation's highest concentration of residents in extremely poor neighborhoods, according to a study released Wednesday by the Brookings Institution, the Washington, D.C., think tank."

 

I know Paul personally because I also pastor in Central California. (You can read more of some of his life-impacting work in the February/March 2005 issue of OneVoice.)

 

Where else do see Church of God congregations living out their mission within their local communities? Let's share examples as models and encouragements for the rest of who are looking for effective and meaningful ways to truly reach out. I will try to post and/or link examples when they come my way.

 

 

Hurricane relief

Here's another update (and request for assistance) posted on CHOGTalk by Debbie Weiger:

Greetings Brothers and Sisters in Christ;

This morning I wanted to update you all on a need that came across my desk. Louisiana as you all know has been extremely devastated by the disasters that have hit our country. I spoke this morning with Fred Dowden who has been asked by the Church of God in Louisiana to coordinate efforts for the south region of this state and its relief efforts. He expressed an urgent need for workers to come and help. They are in need of money, carpenters, electricians, roofers, tree cutters and debris removal. They have housing and food for any one who would like to come and help. RV hook-ups are available as well. They are trying to have teams come in like the Mississippi has done, but they will take anyone that is willing.

On behalf of the Church of God in Alabama and Mississippi I want to thank everyone for the loving response that you have shown to these two states and I ask that you continue to do so. If you have not found an area to help or contribute please give Fred Dowden a call at 864-357-5186. Your prayers, calls, and support are continually needed.

Rachael Woosley
Disaster Relief Coordinator-Alabama Church of God Ministries
205-612-3486

 

Rapture Safety cards

And now for something completely different ...

 

Aren't you glad we don't have to worry about this!

 

 

From LarkNews.com, "Rapture Safety cards to prepare parishioners, airline-style"

 

Work Day

On Saturday our church conducted its semi-annual "work day", a designated time to bring a large group of our people together for a mass effort to take care of important building and maintenance issues that tend to get neglected in the normal routines of things. This time it was different, and part of a growing new orientation for our congregation.

 

This summer when we began seriously wrestling with our mission, one of the many ideas that was floated concerned our work day. It should not just be for ourselves, but hopefully an opportunity to take our labors into our community.

 

Saturday was the first such occasion. While we completed a wide range of needed projects around our church facility, a team of workers made their trek off-site to make contact with some of our neighbors. They offered to do some yard work, of course without cost, but because we want to share God's love.

 

As one woman shared in our service yesterday" "it was the highlight of the day". Prior to this, making contact with our immediate neighbors is not something we have been very good at. The joy of helping others and making a personal connection left a strong impression. By our next work day  I can see us doing even more. And, more importantly, we are adopting a new attitude and perspective of what is involved in mission.