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.