Is unity in the future of our Church

I was saddened this week by the congregations in Virginia that voted, overwhelmingly, to leave the Episcopal Church. I understand and even support their decision, I was just sad that once again our differences have splintered the church.

How do we prevent these types of splits within the Church of the Nazarene. I doubt that the ordination of homosexuals will lead to a split anytime soon within our denomination, but there is always potential for other issues to be devisive. There is already tension between the denominational leadership and some of the communities around the globe whose theology and lifestyles don't fit a classic Nazarene mold. The issues of alcohol and charismatic gifts are very big issues for congregations outside of North America. Some critics have said that this is why there hasn't been a GS elected from these regions. So how do we stay unified within the denomination and make sure we are staying true to our missional call?

There are more Nazarenes outside the US than there inside of it. Is this reflected in our leadership, Manual and the Covenant of Christian Conduct? No, not always. Old white men have unquestionably dominated the leadership of the church. Some women have had leadership positions, but theologically they have been virtually identical to the men who have held those positions. That is not to knock the strong foundation of leadership the church has had, just to acknowledge a startling lack of diversity in any regard. Theologically, missionally, age, sex, race, and nationality have been mainly homogenous. To maintain unity in the future, the leadership of the denomination will need to reflect the vastly changed demographics of the denomination. Maybe big Mid-western Nazarene Churches aren't the only places to find our leaders.

To maintain unity, our denomination will have to change. It will have to reflect changing constituency, different cultures and perhaps changing theology. When our denomination was birthed it seemed important to stand out from Pentecostals and their charismatic practices. If a large part of our denomination now practices that spiritual gifts, should our manual say that we don't believe they exist? Can we allow diversity on such an issue to maintain unity?

Those are some initial thoughts on what we need as a denomination to maintain unity. Does anyone else have any thoughts?

Things You CAN’T Do When You’re NOT In A Pool

I think this video is hilarious, then again I am just kind of twisted that way. But I would have to agree that there are some things that you can only do in a pool.

I was reading a criticism of the emergent movement the other day; it wasn’t really a fair criticism, though there are a few fair criticisms of the movement to be had. But this was your typical fundamentalist, fear based, sounding criticism that said that the emergent movement and post modern-culture was nothing more than relativism.

That got me thinking, and to me relativism doesn’t sound all that bad. When it comes right down to it truth is often revealed in relative terms. I am not saying that there are no absolutes, but I would say that ironically absolute truth is most completely revealed in the context of the person of Jesus Christ. In addition to this, as disciples of Christ, we best walk in truth in the context of our relationship to Christ. Our faith is relative to the person of Jesus Christ and is absolutely dependent on this context.

Next to Himself, Jesus said that the law was most completely summed up by loving God and loving our neighbor. If anything requires us to discern truth relative to our context it is these two essential commandments.

Following the rest of the law without regard to considering the context of how to best love God and our neighbor in each moment is how the Pharisees got off track. To them, context was not an issue because the law was “absolute”. Jesus would point this out to them in the story of the Good Samaritan when he portrayed the religious leaders ignoring their foreign neighbor in need because of their “absolute” interpretation of the law that called them to be separate from the foreigner (among other things). The truth is Jesus said that the entire law was relative to the simple commands to love God and our neighbors.

The thing many Christians find difficult to do when they are trying to navigate how to make decisions is to say to themselves the simple words, “it depends”. Apparently we can not determine right and wrong purely on a strict religious code or rules, but we may have to ask ourselves what is the best way to proceed relative to how to best love God and our neighbor.

Relativism takes the time to consider context and relationship. Not doing this would be like writing rules for what you can and can not do in a pool and applying them as an absolute that covers every aspect of your life regardless of the context of the pool.

Some things people do out of a misguided view of “absolute truth” has them interacting with the world like the guys in the video who apparently did not know that their behavior only made sense relative to the context of a swimming pool. Many Christians screaming "absolute truth” look just as foolish.

Relativism isn’t all bad, in fact many characteristics of the gospel are built upon it. If we do not pay attention to our context and our relationships and how we are to live the truth relative to people today then we will fail to live out the Kingdom in the here and now. That seems like the truth to me - relatively speaking.

Peace,

James