-
Website
http://emergentnazarenes.blogspot.com -
Original page
http://emergentnazarenes.blogspot.com/2009/02/church-of-nazarene-will-end-in-next-15.html -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
I think the issues are complex and simply predicting the end of the Nazarene is a bit extreme. I think that the power centers will become more diverse. We shouldn't underestimate the staying power of institutions like colleges and universities. When looking at the trends within the USA/CAN its not inconceivable to say by 2050 the CON will be less significant with the these borders and that the make up of the body within the USA/CAN will look global in and of itself.
I think the Universities have great power to define what the CON looks like in 40 years. They are most more connected with the global world than the "Global Ministries Center."
Here's an article that more broadly defines the collapse of the evangelical church in North America. http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/my-predicti...
I think your call for humility (clearly the call of the gospel) is right on. But this is complex for those who identify with the emerging church. Because...and this ironic, while we hope for international sharing and diversity, in all likelihood this will mean that the church as a whole will become more conservative(for lack of a better term) than less. Some will champion this as good news, right? But it will make some of us a bit uncomfortable--we might find the CON fifteen years from not even more difficult to exist within.
There are structural models that have contained more healthily the diversity international bodies (ie. Anglican Communion). We would do well to investigate these. Some of these ideas have been explored, but how in the world do you lead that kind of change? We must become flatter and more collaborative all at the same time.
Anyway, those are some random thoughts. I'm sure this will cultivate some interesting discussion. I hope we'll be nice to each other. :-)
Will the CotN be around in 15? Yes, but it will have either done as you suggested and found a way to flatten in a relatively peaceful way, or we will see a division with a much smaller and North American church that will die out as the generations pass.
As a global community we must help others assume the stewardship in order to maintain the energy of the organization. My core is telling me that we in the N.A. CotN have lost our clout and ability to inspire vision, and I feel we have much to learn from our brothers and sisters around the world about what a true global vision for missions is.
Indeed the role conservatism would play would may be a helpful corrective that helps keep our church centered on the gospel of Jesus Christ, his death and resurrection. I think in many ways that strain of conservatism is less dangerous since it does not seem to be coupled with an unholy patriotism for America.
I think we can dialogue well, but if individuals choose to view their position and power as somehow privileged by the Holy Spirit than they will indeed fight my sentiments, I am sure of it.
Peace,
David
that said I do think our general (and sometimes very specific) tendency to identify "ministry" as "USA / Canada" and "missions" as "the rest of the world" is seriously unhealthy, and hopefully this is something that will be reconsidered soon by.. the people who are in the position to reconsider that kind of thing for us.
1) Globalization of Leadership - as you pointed out David the North American church will have to become less for the COTN to become more. We certainly don't need to continue the endless stream of North American white people, especially from the Midwest to the role of GS.
2) Restructuring - the institution itself of the denomination is set up simply to propagate its existence. The changing economic realities and the lessening of the North American domination of the church will, as you pointed out, require a flattening and a divergence of the leadership. Top down isn't going to cut it for long.
3) Holiness Reeducation - Had to throw this one in here since it is the name of my blog. Our ideas of holiness must expand beyond some sense of personalized sin management and become an awareness of our corporate responsibilities in this world.
4) More Wesley Less Fundamentalism - We are at best a bastardized version of Wesleyanism at this stage. The fundamentalist roots of our founding have really taken a toll on our Wesleyan heritage. Let's dilute the fundamentalist background with more sacraments, liturgy, and celebration of our connection rather than our individuality.
5) Stop pretending we are something that we aren't - We have emphasized our peculiarity for so long that we have started to believe our own press clippings. Despite a 100 years of holiness emphasis, revivals, and evangelists, and 100 million altar calls (give or take) we are facing the same dilemmas as everyone else. Our people live like the rest of culture, we can't keep our young people in the church, we are losing any denominational loyalties, and we are struggling to effectively minister to the communities on the margins.
There's my nickles worth..
One thing that I'm concerned about is, how will the GS's be able to play a vital role in all these different world area's. Would we not be better of having the DS's assume the role of Bishop and Chief Shepherd of the folk of Christ? Not to take anything away from the work that our GS's are doing now.
Peace,
Steven
Maybe part of the answer for our future is an acceptance that to be Nazarene in South America feels more pentecostal, to be Nazarene in North America is to be more middle of the road evangelical and to be Nazarene in Asia or Europe will have a distinctly different flavor. Won't we have more strength as a people if we are okay with having diversity and unity?
As far as the structures go with the GS's I agree, so why not revamp the entire GS system. Why do we only have 6? Shouldn't we have a lot more than that with a church spread around the globe. Divide the world into regions, let each region have its own GS that understands its flavor, its needs and its churches. Let's have 12 GS's elected from all over the world. This seems far more consistent with the idea of the church to me.
I have no problem with diversity, we are a very divers body of believers and becoming more divers all the time. I'm sure it will not be common worship, but I do hope that we will on a whole embrace a more classic Wesleyan/Arminian theology.
I like what you suggested about having 12 GS's, that would probable work better for the CotN then having all of the DS's assume the role of Bishop. Even though I like the idea myself. I think it would be good for the GS to live and work in that area of the World and not rotate around every 2 years. Hopeful they would even be from that region of the world. But I'm sure that will be a few years down the road.
Being that we have two GS's retiring this General Assembly, it will be interesting to see who gets voted in.
Peace,
Steven
Now, Annoyed. Where did you get that sentiment in my post?
Indeed recommending that we listen to our global brothers and sisters is far from the haphazard bandaid you seem to imply in my statements.
I guess I would feel more inclined to listen if you would back up your comments with a name.
America is blessed by God and who are we to say that the COTN's leadership is specifically blessed by God. Now if we say that America or our leadership is singularly blessed by God then we have a problem. But I am pretty sure that not many Nazarene's believe that.
If Nazarene around the world find us to be arrogant becoming their "guide" is not going to help us change their minds. I am not sure that they need our guidance as much they need our support. I heard through the grape vine that they have leadership of their own guided by God.
Indeed the article is designed to push some strong buttons. I can't assume how those in power perceive their position, only observe the collective effect our power has had. Indeed I agree most wouldn't ever consider their position in a colonialist light. The broader issue at hand is that there are external forces at work in our world and it's culture that will have the effect of tearing apart the church unless we find a way to navigate that transition and find unity. The problem is most people don't see it coming.
I think it is possible though you underestimate the sway of the culture wars has had on the denomination. I see signs of hope that we are removing ourselves from those days and it's rhetoric but it's roots run deep, especially in the mid-west, and will hold firm in many churches. And where this exists it is an arrogance that is confused as righteousness.
Again, I don't know the perceptions of the rest of the world. But it is true that due to the size of the North American voting block that we do not have to actively restrict, or conspire to malign those within the international community, we can do it passively by simply voting as a block, it requires no effort. Because of that those in North America need to humble ourselves enough and perhaps even restrain ourselves into listening to those other voices and maybe even voting on their behalf.
I would argue to that my views are my own, this site is not a 'you all' type of grouping. In fact I am probably more conservative than I come across, simply I don't have a particular image I am preserving, or a license to protect, and so I don't mind pushing the conversation where I (not we) feel it needs to go.
"I heard through the grape vine that they have leadership of their own guided by God." I agree with you completely. The thing is, it would seem that our polity and voting doesn't affirm it. How do we let them lead, and even lead us? That is the question I am asking here.
To be sure we should be listening to our people across the pond but I believe that your rhetoric can create a voting block of the guilty. A voting block that votes someone in based on guilt for passed wrongs. Our voting can be based on many things but it should not be based on guilt.
I hear what you are saying about letting them lead and even lead us but as you have probably discussed here before, their leadership may not be what you want in the end. Maybe that is what God wants but I am truly unqualified to speak for him/her or whatever you are into.
As much as "you all"(Emergents) like to think that pining you is like nailing Jello to a wall, you are not that slippery.
And then you have John Seaman who is a DS from Michigan advocating a return to the "holiness language". This is the reason I left the Nazarene church....listening to dogmatic trash like he is advocating.
Then you have a secret society in the leadership of the denomination where no one knows how much GS's or DS's make. Go figure why this denomination won't last long.
I would clarify from my perspective, when I was a delegate to our district convention last year the DS' pay was right there as a line item in the budget we voted on. I don't know if he accepts offerings other than that, but at least I know that is the case here. As for the GS statement I have no idea either what they make, but I am sure it is less than what a parallel position in a company would be. Considering their travel schedules and time away from family it is probably a very difficult job. I don't know if you have ever met Jim Diehl for instance, but he has a heart and passion for reaching the lost that is beautiful and humbling. This doesn't change that the systems need more flattening and as you suggest, greater transparency.
If there is a great divide in the church, I don't think it will be over [just] leadership. Time will tell.
I found interesting the author's statement that "many of our children and grandchildren are going to abandon ship". I have been watching this abondonment since the 60's. In this time frame, I bet as many "birth" Nazarenes have left the church as there are current members, probably more. Does anyone address why?
I think part of the problem is idolatry. The bible repeatedly points out that idolatries always fail. One quote in the article references refers to this idolotry, "Evangelicals have identified their movement with the culture war and with political conservatism." A major part of this is what the author refers to as "rhetorically pro-life." The children see the "rhetoric"
"I got the sense that way too many Christians are anchored to the “empire” of America", This is nothing but idolatry. People are abondoning ship because the church isnt religion, it's practicing ideology and an ideology that is totally illogical. These are only a few of the issues. Your children see the hyposcrisy and the illogic in all this and they bail. All political agenda's fail. when you tie your religion to a political agenda then it will also fail. This is the final misery of idolatry.
The other thing the church has allowed is the entry of unclean spirits, homophobia being the principal and worst. "We’re going to find out that being against gay marriage" is disastrous.
The end result is that you have a church that can't articulate the Gospel, and that is just straight up gospel in an age of enlightenment. The ability to articulate the gospel to a post modern world is out of the question.
1. Question: Aren't there 3 GS's who are retiring? Deihl (b. 1937), Cunningham (b. 1937), Gunter (b. 1940). To be re-elected, they can't be over 68. Right?
2. I was pleased 4 years ago that we elected Nina Gunter (our first woman), but I was greatly disappointed that we didn't get anyone from outside the USA. This time around we get three shots at it. I'm hoping we'll get at least two from outside the USA.
3. The structure of the Church of the Nazarene needs a total overhaul. This is normal for institutions that grow and change. We simply have too much "territory" to cover for 6 GS's to do all of the work effectively. We drive them into the ground by flying them all over the world all the time. I think the idea of having regionally elected GS's is a great idea. 12 regions might be a little much, but we need something different. Also the Eurasia Region needs to be broken up. It's unreasonable to have Portugal and India on the same region! These kinds of changes will require major steps of leadership.
My questions:
Will our current leaders (and/or the ones we elect in 2009) have the courage and foresight to lead in these needed structural changes?
If not, how can we lowly peons work to instigate this kind of change (and some of the other changes many of us rant about)?
Peace.
Peace,
Steven
I have this to say. Jesus was not Pluralistic and definately took a "Dominant" role. Jesus said, "I am the way the truth and the life, no one comes to the father but by me" (that sounds pretty singular to me), The pharisies of the day often commented how he spoke with power and authority. We are to live as Christ.
I agree that the time is short. That is all the more reason we are not to mix the truth of the gospel with other "influences" or religions. Every time the Israelites did this it led them away from God, not toward him.
Another thing. You called it "arrogant" to say that God has blessed our nation. He has. It is clearly evident. To acknowledge Gods blessing and providence is not a sin and does not need to be repented for. In fact, the Bible says we need to be thankful in everything, including his blessing. To ignore his blessings as a matter of chance is, in my opinion, something to be repentant for.
I noticed several references to "The Conversation". Let us be careful not to focus on mere conversation. We need to focus on Gods word so we wont be blown by every wind of doctrine.
Americans do not have the corner on truth, or on how to run a denomination, never have and never will. The statement isn't an epistemological statement about scripture, it simply recognizes that there are international leaders that are growing and thriving, and they need to be heard within the walls of an 'International' church.
Yes God has blessed our nation, but that does not mean we always get our way. When we say we are must be in the 'right' because we are doing what God wants ignores the biblical fact that God shows favor to who ever he wants, he makes it rain on the good and the evil alike according to his will. Just because we are blessed does not mean we are correct.
The simple minded seek a theistic explanation. The world is no longer simple minded. The simple minded are not running the world. The people running this world do not seek explanations, they know exactly how it works and they are working it. They tell the simple minded they are born again. The simple minded believe them
Peace,
David
Local Nazarene churches will persist, however the denomination will need to surrender even more if it's power to the local congregations to determine what a faithful Nazarene community is in that context.
It will need to follow more of a decentralized 'Starfish' model of ministry.
The church needs to reorganize largely under the context of Missions with the main focus of the church being pursuit of God's mission in each context. We must reclaim missiology as the informer of all of our ecclesiology and stop thinking of it as something as those 'called people' do over 'there' and think of missiology as something we ALL do RIGHT HERE.
To take into account Brian's sentiments above, there are international churches that need to develop in their own directions which may be more pentecostal or conservative than the European or North American churches. And it needs to be okay for that to happen. Your right we are already incredibly good at letting local churches have power, however there will be an intense external pressure I feel as the next two generations pass to try for one last go at strong central authority as some move into protectionist modes.
I hear you about the pastor/board thing and that is a struggle. I think a lot of the churches that have a board vs. pastor struggle it is systemic to that body, it doesn't matter who the pastor is. With that said I think we will find that churches with that uncooperative stigma will simply find that their D.S. isn't throwing them any bones when the last pastor leaves and ultimately closing the doors. Which brings us to the centralized ownership of the church which is it's biggest stick. If a congregation no longer feels that in order to be faithful to Jesus in their context they must relinquish their Nazarene status all tangible assets revert to the district, who in actuality never did anything for it while receiving the benefits of it. I can see a day when we may have thousands of un-used buildings falling into dis-repair as churches die organically or ecclesially, that is not an 'image' I think we want.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/180107/page/2
http://dougpaul.wordpress.com/
You have to scroll back thru the blog to find the "Young Evangelical" series.
"But Obama's speech on race resonated with Glisson's own view that there are many paths to God..."
Contrast what Obama said with what Jesus said:
"I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." (John 14:6, New International Version)
Glisson, and all, should have listened to Jesus on the subject, not Obama.
Why are the postmodern congregations seemingly attended by so many thuniversalists?
This is how you end up with proof texting
A man dissatisfied with his life decided to consult the Bible for guidance. Closing his eyes, he flipped the book open and pointed to a spot on the page. Opening his eyes, he read the verse under his finger. It read, "Then Judas went away and hanged himself" (Matthew 27:5b) Closing his eyes again, the man randomly selected another verse. This one read, "Jesus told him, 'Go and do likewise.'" (Luke 10:37b)
When I lived in China for close to six years, I witnessed first hand the incredible power of what God is doing there. As I walked and worked among these remarkable people, I began to get a glimpse of what you are talking about in your post. As you say, it is time that we "repent of our arrogance."
Thanks for the post.
Mick
I was just named runner up in a contest for best writing blog in Oklahoma. I hope you'll stop by and visit my blog. I will be writing more about the emergent church in the future. One thing that bothers me about the Church of the Nazarene is how difficult it is for outsiders to penetrate the community. It's like a subculture with walls that are nearly impossible for an outsider to scale. It's very discouraging, but I stay. I had many professors at SNU that helped me gain different perspectives on the church - Dr. Tashjian, Dr. Lively, Prof. Waterman, just to name a few.
Welcome glad to have you here.
I have totally missed out on about the last week of comments, sorry about that.
I think that the example of membership is a great example of where things are changing from the bottom up. While the denomination continues to insist on different lifestyle choices as necessities for membership many churches within the denomination, especially those that are growing and reaching into the post church crowd, are not holding members to these same standards.
I won't speak for any particular churches in this regard, but as I talk to different pastors it seems that there is this sense where in order to reach those outside of Nazarenedom, let alone the kingdom, they have to down play their Nazareneness. I now find in a new assignment pastoring a church that was an restart and it is barely Nazarene in many ways.
Change is coming one way or another it is more a question of whether the structure of the church will flex to allow churches on the fringes to remain in the denomination or will push them out.
I agree that change is coming from the bottom up. And again, this is just my experience, but I don't experience resistance to this change from the "up". Rather, I've always been encouraged by my District leaders and the folks in the "Global Ministry Center" that I know to contextualize ministry in the local context. Perhaps the "power issues" that prompted this post are regional / district specific.
I whole heartily agree, I think we need to disciple our new member as followers of Christ who part of the CotN. I think that you are right-on when you encourage baptism as a precursor to membership. I can not believe we except unbaptized people as members of the CotN. I think that baptism is much more important then membership. Even though the general CotN pushes for membership more, baptism is the means of grace by which we become members of the visible Body of Christ. That's why my teenage kids are baptized but have not yet join the CotN.
Peace,
Steven
I hope that clarifies a bit.
I am reading the book "The Starfish and the Spider" right now. I'm not far enough into the book to know whether the authors think that a centralized organization can of it's own will decide to become decentralized. My gut tells me that a centralized organization decentralizes only if its survival instinct leads it there, and even then not with the consensus of all stakeholders.
As I read your post I had to conclude that you surely have a deficient understanding of the Church of the Nazarene as it is. The governance
of the Church of the Nazarene, this body of believers belonging to God, is entrusted by His guidance to the great men and women, not only of the USA, but of many other countries around the world, who are faithful to its doctrine, who are men and women of prayer and supplication, of sacrificial living, having documented lives of faith, who are hardworking servants of the Master as they follow His will to continue to extend the message the Church of the Nazarene brings to people of the USA and the world who have not yet heard the message of holiness. The govern- mental structure of the Church of the Nazarene is second to none, encouraging local congregations to express holiness living by extending ourselves to our neighborhoods as well as to mission fields around the globe, while providing denominational guidance to these local congregations that certifies their sermons, teaching, and activities
as being in agreement with the standards set forth in our Manual.
I do not doubt your sincerity or your goodwill in your efforts to publicize the Emergent Church movement's concept of what is "wrong" with the Church of the Nazarene and other denominations, but I believe you need a much more indepth knowledge and understanding of all that this denomination is doing for God and the people He so longs to reach, to elevate, to save from sin and its terrible repercussions. I am always just amazed at all that our wonderful denomination is doing for His sake all over the world. I've been a Nazarene all of my 61 years, and I am still learning that, with all my knowledge, I still know next to nothing when it comes to all the many ministries that Nazarenes extend to the people of our world.
Shock waves? Hardly. The Church of the Nazarene is at the forefront of change as it becomes necessary in the work of bringing the Gospel
of Jesus Christ, His power to save, sanctify, heal, and empower--His great power to change lives--to those who need Him. I respectfully suggest that you and others involved in the Emergent Church movement seek to follow the leading of the Lord, and, if that path is incompatible with the doctrines, practices, and government of the Church of the Nazarene or any other denomination, that you form your own body(ies) of worship, thus separating yourselves from denominations that you feel are mistaken in their work of Jesus, our Lord. Therefore, you will not need to expend your energies to "correct" all that is "wrong" with the various denominations from which you draw, rather you will be freed to give yourselves wholeheartedly to the work to which you believe you have been called. If it is truly of God, then it will be blessed by Him, if not, then you will know at some point in your efforts that He is not in it.