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/)