As you may know, I have been trained as a historian. My primary interest is in what was called, "The History of Christian Revivalism," in the day I was trained.
My dissertation was in the history of the Church of God that is connected to the ministry of the nineteenth century revivalist, John Winebrenner.
Winebrenner was, like me, no intellectual giant. And, like him, I am, theologically speaking, a radical primitivist. What remains of the body Winebrenner began is also, officially, but only officially, primitivist.
On the day Winebrenner's gang formed under the name, the Church of God, Winebrenner rallied the men and women who shared his passion and vision to, first of all, devote themselves to the conversion of sinners and, then, secondly, to establish churches "on the New Testament."
I am not ashamed to pursue what a friend of mine calls that "primal" faith in Jesus.
In my intentionally and self-consciously unsophisticated way of following Jesus, I read the Bible, not only as Scripture but also as a group of ancient documents describing life among the people of God.
----------------
In the Bible and within the history of Christianity, I see two ways in which people, who are no longer thriving spiritually, return to the Lord.
----------------
The, by far, less common of the two, is described, most dramatically, in the Bible in the Book of Jonah.
According to the story, Jonah showed up in the city of Nineveh saying that in 40 days the city would be overthrown.
The people of Nineveh, surprisingly, believed. And, the king of Nineveh put on sackcloth and commanded the whole city to do the same. The people followed along with their leader and the Lord showed mercy.
This is the Ninevite, top down, revival.
----------------
What happens more frequently is that fiery, often tumultuous, change that comes through whacked out radicals on the fringe, operating beyond the edges of institutional religion...
...the biblical prophets, people like Elijah and John (the Baptist), even Jesus wandering around Galilee, whom, the elite within the religious institution, must have seen as insane.
In the relatively recent history of Christianity, Luther, a lateral-thinking, young professor at an unimportant Roman Catholic university in Germany?, the methodists, the Wesleys and the others, who graduated from Oxford only to preach a simple message among the most common people of England, the unwashed holiness and Pentecostal revivalists whipping up a boisterous religious movement a hundred years ago and more.
----------------
As a lover of the tepid remains of John Winebrenner's movement, I am convinced that the body's Eastern Regional Conference has recently gone 0 for 2 as it bumped up against the chance for positive change...for revival.
----------------
More than a year ago, the Conference's institutional leaders realized that, as a result of decades of numerical decline and spiritual decay, the Conference was in crisis.
The dramatic example of the king of Nineveh shone before them in the Bible, their "only rule of faith and practice."
The several, less dramatic yet still powerful, examples of Old Testament kings who believed the words of the prophets and led radical, even violent, change provided, for ERC leaders, a biblical road map for revival.
Did Conference leaders become, as Jesus said it, "poor in spirit?" Did they put on sack cloth and tell others in the Conference to do the same? Did they beg for mercy?
No.
They turned inside themselves. They talked among themselves. They devised a plan that included themselves. And, elevated themselves.
They proposed a new Strategic Plan that presented a revised and expanded religious institution as the solution to the Conference's spiritual woes.
0 for 1.
----------------
In the Churches of God, even today, legal, and spiritual authority, according to its Constitution, still resides in the hands of the members of the Conference.
As much as the leaders of the Conference, wanted to attack the challenges of the future by reorganizing and expanding the institutional hierarchy, the members of the Conference possessed the power to choose its own way,...
...to decide which voice, or voices it would listen to...
...their hierarchical leaders who are advocates of institutional religion and who devised the new Strategic Plan...
...the Bible, it's only rule of faith and practice...
...or the voices, especially those speaking as the Conference gathered,...
...who boldly called the Conference delegates to stand against the leaders of the institution...
...and to seek a different way.
The Conference could have considered different voices.
Since leadership had presented its plan with no biblical foundation, delegates could have turned to the Word and demanded, from leadership, a presentation of their plan supported by teachings from the Word.
The Conference didn't do that. It didn't turn to the Word.
It, in effect, chose the people of the institution over the power of the Word.
The Conference chose the conventional and the moderate over the radical and the fringe.
0 for 2.
----------------
There are two ways that the people of God have chosen to return to the Lord.
The Eastern Regional Conference of the Churches of God, has chosen to reject both of them.
===============
I wrote this post in a more academic style than has become normal for me...
...a style of posting that was common for me in the days of The CGGC in an Emerging World blog.
I'm writing this post in this style because I believe that what the Conference did on January 13, 2018 is as mind-numbed and hypocritical as any action of the Conference at any time in its history.
We must repent.
No comments:
Post a Comment