Is restructuring in the future of the Church of the Nazarene?

[G R 'Scott' Cundiff]

Keith Drury has a very interesting article on the resturcturing of the United Brethren in Christ: (http://www.ub.org/)

http://www.drurywriting.com/keith/reinventing.denomination.htm

[Wesley Smith]

My, My, My! I'm just getting ready to head home from the office, but will give an off-the-cuff response. In general, I would be supportive of a restructuring of our denomination. My impression is, however, that we are a long way off from making such changes. Way too many "positions" that depend on the local church for support. Lots of our people would have to go back into the "actual" ministry. (ducking!)

Would wonder if restructuring would make us more or less effective in reaching people for Jesus. How much doctrinal cohesiveness would there be? The idea of local clusters is very attractive.

Will think about this and post again later.

Friend,

Wes

[William Hunter]

My, My, My! I'm just getting ready to head home from the office, but will give an off-the-cuff response. In general, I would be supportive of a restructuring of our denomination. My impression is, however, that we are a long way off from making such changes. Way too many "positions" that depend on the local church for support. Lots of our people would have to go back into the "actual" ministry. (ducking!)

Would wonder if restructuring would make us more or less effective in reaching people for Jesus. How much doctrinal cohesiveness would there be? The idea of local clusters is very attractive.

Will think about this and post again later.

Friend,

Wes

I'm not in favor of going as far as this example of restructuring in going. I do think we need to be rid of the distirct superintendency. I do not believe my local church has ever been helped by having that position taking so much money out of the local church. It may be that more of our churches could then support our world mission efforts and our regional colleges. Also at the district level, if we did away with the DS position, maybe we could take some of the multiplied millions of dollars tied up in investment accounts for the district and either return the money to local churches or put into mission efforts here and around the world.

There are some other positions that could be eliminated at HQ, but like you said, Wes, there may be too many who depend on taking money out of the local church to support themselves. Sure would be nice to see them back in the ministry of reaching lost people for Jesus.

I would also like to see the church building returned to ownership of the people who paid for it.

I really like the idea of voluntary clusters over zones or areas like we have here. But we would need some method of making sure some pastor who is out there and not making contact, gets drawn in so that he does not get isolated. That happens too often in our current structure. I'd also like to see some way of providing fellowship between our spouses. Our wives are too often left out. My daughter and her husband pastor on the KC dist. This year for Christmas, the DS made sure the spouse was on the receiving end at the dist. pastors Christmas gathering. I've always received but my wife receives nothing. I rather have my wife and children remembered by the dist. and the local church, than me.

I do think we have some room to take restructuring seriously. I'm not ready to see the extreme of this example, but we could go along way in saving alot of money and being more effective in what we do. I love our denomination, but it is not perfect in its structure. If this modified type of restructuring was brought up, I wonder how much weeping and nashing of teeth would come from some who feed off local churches? It certainly would prove interesting.

I remember Dr. Charles Strictland sharing at the first PALCON that when they went to three districts in FL., he had received calls from 12 pastors saying they were positively called by God to be the DS on this new dist. He said that it sounded like God had developed an emotional problem. Then Strictland belly laughed and told us that he called someone totally different than those 12 and it was someone who did not contact him first. Having worked on dist. boards and counsels, I cannot for the life of me understand why anyone would seek to give up pastoring for a job like that.

Anyway, I think some form of restructuring would help us be more efficient and effective and leave more money for our local churches and mission efforts.

Oh! Janet and Warren are scheduled to be with us in Oct. '06 for a weekend. We went to school with Warren and the two of them and Virginia and me are good friends. Our girls are about the same age as theirs. We went camping together on Lake Michigan and have many good times together. We even had the priviledge of having them with us for two weeks once. that was a treat.

[G R 'Scott' Cundiff]

I wonder what kind of organization we would design if we were starting from nothing in 2006? Clearly, it is a looser organization that is preferred in the U.S. today. Here we are with all these independent churches all over the place.

[Wesley Smith]

Just say a congregation holding deed to its own property decided to be charismatic. What leverage would the denomination have in such a situation (local church holding the deed)?

IF we would radically restructure, which I consider to be nearly impossible within my lifetime, but a certainty at some point, I think it would spell the end of the church as we have known it for nearly a hundred years and would open the door to all sorts of variances. However I am of the opinion that not much uniformity exists within the church as it now is. The "constant" is that with the denomination holding title, it seems that budgets, and to a certain degree, staffing, is controlable by the district and general church.

Someone wrote either here or on a different forum that the Generals or a General had stated that there was only room for one doctrine in the Church of the Nazarene. I laughed when I read that. Not sure I know two people in the denomination who are identical in their doctrine.

A few Nazarene pastors with whom I'm associated are considering establishing a movement outside the formal structure of the Church of the Nazarene to attempt to bring/facilitate renewal. We are not talking governmental issues, rather spirit and spiritual and methodological and growth issues.

Something HAS to happen. My hope, of course, it that what happens results in the sort of change that makes us more effective and more efficient.

Friend,

Wes

PS. So you know my sister and brother in law? They are going to tour on the Washington Pacific District. I hope to schedule them here in Longview!

[Hans Deventer]

Very interesting article indeed. I'm not sure if following all of it would be a good idea. Over here, the district owns the property, enabling it to mortage different buildings to help get a loan of a new church.
As to the clusters, there are 11 Dutch Nazarene churches, there are not that many ways to cluster them.

Doctrinal Stability & “the Covenant.”

I like that idea, but with centrally owned property, you've go a problem there.
I have been thinking about having local membership that way, though. That idea still sounds good to me.

I think the most interesting paragraph is the first one though. We don't want DS to mess with our local church, UNLESS of course our local church isn't moving in the direction we want. But we can't have it both ways.

[William Hunter]

Just say a congregation holding deed to its own property decided to be charismatic. What leverage would the denomination have in such a situation (local church holding the deed)?

IF we would radically restructure, which I consider to be nearly impossible within my lifetime, but a certainty at some point, I think it would spell the end of the church as we have known it for nearly a hundred years and would open the door to all sorts of variances. However I am of the opinion that not much uniformity exists within the church as it now is. The "constant" is that with the denomination holding title, it seems that budgets, and to a certain degree, staffing, is controlable by the district and general church.

Someone wrote either here or on a different forum that the Generals or a General had stated that there was only room for one doctrine in the Church of the Nazarene. I laughed when I read that. Not sure I know two people in the denomination who are identical in their doctrine.

A few Nazarene pastors with whom I'm associated are considering establishing a movement outside the formal structure of the Church of the Nazarene to attempt to bring/facilitate renewal. We are not talking governmental issues, rather spirit and spiritual and methodological and growth issues.

Something HAS to happen. My hope, of course, it that what happens results in the sort of change that makes us more effective and more efficient.

Friend,

Wes

PS. So you know my sister and brother in law? They are going to tour on the Washington Pacific District. I hope to schedule them here in Longview!

I know we have a few congregations get off track with the tongues issue, but i think that is better resolved with better training of our pastors, and better training in the local church. I like Stan Toler's "Making Disciples" material. In reading the book, "Membership Matters" by Chuck Lawless, I see that good training in the spirit of Eph. 4:11-16 is the direction we need to go in our local churches.

I still believe we do not need the DS position and some others at the general level. We are too top heavy and it takes just too much money to operate instead of releasing that money for effective ministry. the local church cannot continue to subsidize such overhead and do ministry too, at home and around the world. The budget structure is out of balance, in part because it is being drained to support positions that produce little or nothing that effectively helps the local church in ministry to lost people.

Anyway, this is a huge subject and you are right, it won't happen in our lifetimes. There are too many whose livlihood depends on money taken out of the local church and out of missions.

Yes, we are friends with Janet and Warren. We send money to them on occasion and write them (e-mail) and pray consistantly for them. They are wonderful people. We had them here after their first exposure to East Timor. Janet was not real impressed with the idea of going there then. We had three other missionaries, including Virginia Stimer, here while they were with us and they had such a great time of reunion with each other. It was neat to be a part of that. I thikn that was about 3 1/2 yrs. ago now.

[G R 'Scott' Cundiff]

Just say a congregation holding deed to its own property decided to be charismatic. What leverage would the denomination have in such a situation (local church holding the deed)?


I think that a point of their restructuring is that the property belongs to the congregation. If the congregation decides to abandon the doctrine of the church, they will not sign the doctrinal covenant and thus end their relationship with the denomination. At that point they would be free to remain independent or join some other group.

Also, note that the more "ownership" the denomination claims the more chance there is that any lawsuit brought against a local church will reach the denominational level -- the "deep pockets."

[Dave McClung]

I think that a point of their restructuring is that the property belongs to the congregation. "

Perhaps I don't understand what they decided to do, but it sounds like a defense lawyer drove the plan of reorganization -- the concept is that if the denomination doesn't own property, the denomination doesn't have to worry about preventing young people from being molested.

The article didn't say anything about ordination, but if they are consistent, ordination will be by the local church. If ordination is centralized, then they will not be protected from liability.

In my opinion, the best way to protect the Church of the Nazarene from liability is to take the ordination process and the clergy discipline process seriously. The best defense against law suits is always preventing the wrongful acts from occuring in the first place.

I agree that our structure could use some changes, but this example isn't the one for us.

[Dennis M. Scott]

How will this restructuring facilitate more disciples being made from the pagan pool? Anticipated "more funds spent locally" likely won't do it, or we would do that anyway. I like some of what is presented, but am not yet able to see how these changes will encourage energies channeled to missional efforts.

[Carol Kane]

I would like to see more of congregational control in our denomination. I agree with one of the earlier posts that the position and power of the DS needs to be eliminated. It would be interesting to see how others in the pastorate feel concerning this article.

A restructuring is needed for us, perhaps not the "same" type of restructuring. I did not read anything in that article that even suggested remotely leaving their doctrinal stance.

With the COTN in reality it would never pass getting out of committee to be presented on the floor at GA. The question is "If your job was on the line, would you vote to eliminate it?" I think not.

It will be intersting to follow this change with our brothers and sisters in Christ. Much prayer will be needed for them and their changes. We have a friend who within the last 4 years has left the COTN and is now pastoring one of the United Brethren Churches.

[G R 'Scott' Cundiff]

I would like to see more of congregational control in our denomination. I agree with one of the earlier posts that the position and power of the DS needs to be eliminated. It would be interesting to see how others in the pastorate feel concerning this article.

I found the creation of "cluster groups" rather than districts to be interesting. Our district merged with San Antonio a couple of years ago to create a new, geographically large district. One of the features was the creation of "mission areas" with mission area coordinators who are pastors. (We have since added an assistant DS.)

In other words, we actually attempted to create a sort of "cluster group" using the mission areas - so the idea is already out here to do something along these lines.

I really appreciate our district leadership and wonder how the responsibilities at that level would be handled if that level were removed. Still, I have thought in the past that some of our finest leaders were being moved into positions in which they spend most of their time meeting with small church boards having (yet another) pastoral vacancy.

[Carol Kane]

Scott, I agree that cluster groups would be a great tool, I would like to see it used for all our churches as well as home mission churches. I would like to see the DS position eliminated but in reality know that will never happen. Perhaps a better solution could be having the DS rotate off in two years as well as serve as a Pastor. The responsibilities for the function of the district could be evenly spread across the district to include all Pastors (even those Unassigned).

What does everyone else think?

[Chuck Wilkes]

It has some possibilities and tries to address some of the realities of their denomination...realities that in many ways describe our own denomination. At leaset we need to have the discussion.

Chuck

[Dave McClung]

I found the creation of "cluster groups" rather than districts to be interesting.

The article doesn't specifically state, but I assumed that a "cluster group" has no "cluster superintendent." Calling a district a "cluster group" wouldn't change much. Doing away with the office of "district superintendent" would be a radical change!! I think it is a change that is worthy of discussion.

If I understand the purpose of their reorganization, they have done away with the "supervisor" role. The Catholic Church has paid a lot of damages to young men and women who were molested by priests. The reason the church has been liable has been because the supervisors of the priests (in our denomination, that would be the district superintendent) failed to take action to prevent abuse. In some circumstances, they actually moved guilty priests around to avoid detection. If I understand the strategy correctly, the group reviewed in Drury's article simply did away with the role that supervises the clergy. In theory, that would do away with the potential liability. The article didn't state what they did about ordination. If clergy is ordained by the denomination, then there still could be a supervisory role that could create some liability.

In the few cases that have involved Nazarene clergy, the official position of the Church of the Nazarene is that District Superintendents don't supervise pastors. Pastors are subject to the direction and control of the local church and District Superintendents are only facilitators. I have said publically, that I don't think the official position of the denomination is the way most of us understand the role of the D.S. I do believe it will be necessary for us to clarify that role. Would it make you feel better if your district superintendent became the "cluster coordinator" and your district allocations became your "voluntary fair share of cluster support?"

Some of the consequences of eliminating our centralized structure:

District Centers and Camp Grounds would have to be self-supporting. Few of them are, so most would go away.

Nazarene Colleges and Universities would cease to be denominational schools. They would recruit trustees based on their ability to provide financial support to the school rather than on their representation of a district. The strong ones would thirve, but some would disappear.

Without District Superintendents, local churches would be left to find their own pastors.

Many small churches would simply close their doors.

Clergy Ordination would be up to the local church, so there would be even more variance in the minimum qualifications of clergy.

A number of our larger churches would see no value in participation in "clusters" so they would become independent (aren't they self-sustaining now?) Why would Grove City, Denver First, Olathe College, Richmond Southside; York, Pa and such churches need to belong to a cluster?

One other observation. If the Church of the Nazarene adopted a structure lke the one described, we wouldn't have a Church of the Nazarene in Gig Harbor, WA. While Linda and I were away at ENC, the local church had a crisis. Our church is not a wealthy church, but it sits on a very valuable piece of real estate. If they had the ability, without district oversight, to sell the property; I am sure the pastor and the board at that time would have sold it. Being a part of a district preserved the church and prevented a short-term problem from becoming a permanent loss of a local church. It has been my observation that most small churches go through times of life-threatening crisis when short-term issues out weigh the long-term issues. In times like that, I wonder how being part of a "cluster group" would help?

[Hans Deventer]

In the few cases that have involved Nazarene clergy, the official position of the Church of the Nazarene is that District Superintendents don't supervise pastors. Pastors are subject to the direction and control of the local church and District Superintendents are only facilitators. I have said publically, that I don't think the official position of the denomination is the way most of us understand the role of the D.S. I do believe it will be necessary for us to clarify that role.

It was heavvily discussed in committee at the General Assembly last June. The DS's got stuck between the judical trouble on the one hand, which made them reluctant to accept responsibility for a local church's action or situation, while on the other hand not wanting to lose their influence and power. It was an interesting discussion.

[Billy Cox]

The district superintendent is the primary force for denominational cohesiveness. Without the office of DS, the Church of the Nazarene would become a loose confederation of churches.

Whatever relevance the denomination has would be lost without the district superintendency.

In terms of the Great Commission, it may or may not matter except in terms of funding for a unified mission organization. I cannot imagine that we will dismantle the denominational structure just for the purpose of plundering district coffers.

[Wesley Smith]

The most successful evangelical church/movement I am familiar with is Calvary Chapel. Their growth is amazing and spectacular! As far as I know they do not have such an office as District Superintendent.

It can be hard to imagine what things would be like if we opened ourselves to change.

I'm always amazed at Nazarenes regarding the change issue! We all agree that if we don't change, we are going to slowly die and we enthusiastically discuss change. However, when it comes right down to it, we suffer from visional paralysis because we are so down right afraid to step beyond where we've been. Nearly everyone of us can quote the definition of insanity...continuing to do the same things while expecting different results! Only thing is, by and large, we are that definition. (In my humble little opinion. Ducking again!)

Denominational reorganization could help our local churches break out into new arenas of growth. On the other hand, we have a passle of churches that I'm not sure even Jesus could lead into a healthier world-vision.

It is hard for me to imagine that much growth/change is going to happen anywhere in the Church of the Nazarene save in those local situations where brave-hearted, visionary pastors are supported by brave-hearted, visionary lay people.

(Check in every-once-in-awhile here at Longview, WA. I do believe this is such a church.)

Friend, Whole-hearted Member/Supporter of the Church of the Nazarene!,

Wes

[G R 'Scott' Cundiff]

If the only thing holding the denomination together and making it relevant is the office of DS we have already lost it all. And if the only reason for restructuring the church is to plunder money somewhere, it is just plain too late.

In either case, it really doesn't matter what we do does it.


The district superintendent is the primary force for denominational cohesiveness. Without the office of DS, the Church of the Nazarene would become a loose confederation of churches.

Whatever relevance the denomination has would be lost without the district superintendency.

In terms of the Great Commission, it may or may not matter except in terms of funding for a unified mission organization. I cannot imagine that we will dismantle the denominational structure just for the purpose of plundering district coffers.

[G R 'Scott' Cundiff]

The article doesn't specifically state, but I assumed that a "cluster group" has no "cluster superintendent." Calling a district a "cluster group" wouldn't change much. Doing away with the office of "district superintendent" would be a radical change!! I think it is a change that is worthy of discussion.

As I understood it, each cluster is to choose a pastor to server as leader, and the leader is approved by the Bishop.

If I understand the purpose of their reorganization, they have done away with the "supervisor" role.

Whether it is a good idea or not is subject to debate, but I see them to be saying to the local church, "if you share our doctrine, you are one of us, but we won't pretend to be responsible for your local church affairs."

I have always had a suspicion that one reason independent churches seem to do better these days than denominational ones is that the pastor has no where else to go. Instead of getting on the phone to a DS looking for another assignment he has to stay put and work things out. Maybe the key in this approach is simply recognizing a component of the success of so many groups that are not so tightly connected to the denomination.

If I understand the strategy correctly, the group reviewed in Drury's article simply did away with the role that supervises the clergy. In theory, that would do away with the potential liability. The article didn't state what they did about ordination. If clergy is ordained by the denomination, then there still could be a supervisory role that could create some liability.

You very often see things more clearly than I do, so maybe that is what it is all about. I don't see this to be an effort to avoid liability, just to recognize the authority and responsibility of the local church.

Would it make you feel better if your district superintendent became the "cluster coordinator" and your district allocations became your "voluntary fair share of cluster support?"

Well their clusters are no more than 10 churches - so your approach doesn't come anywhere close to recognizing what they are doing.

Some of the consequences of eliminating our centralized structure:?"

Now, I need to say here that I have nowhere advocated that the Church of the Nazarene to exactly what this group has done. I simply asked if some kind of restructuring is in our future. No doubt, we would want to address the items you listed. Just one thought -- there are thriving churches across America that have dealt with everything that is listed, and, apparently done so successfully. They have retreats, they manage to fill pulpits, etc.

All I am saying is that none of the congregational churches are knocking on our doors asking for advice on how to call pastors or support missionaries. There must be alternative ways to do these things. Apparently, the group Drury talked about decided to give it a try.

[Dave McClung]

You very often see things more clearly than I do, so maybe that is what it is all about. I don't see this to be an effort to avoid liability, just to recognize the authority and responsibility of the local church.


It is possible that I read too much into this sentence, "The spate of sexual abuse suits is feeding some of this: in a centralized denomination when one pastor abuses a child the victim can sure “all the way to the top” trying to tap into the resources of districts and denominations. "

I assumed that "sure" was intended to be "sue."

[William Hunter]

The district superintendent is the primary force for denominational cohesiveness. Without the office of DS, the Church of the Nazarene would become a loose confederation of churches.

Whatever relevance the denomination has would be lost without the district superintendency.

In terms of the Great Commission, it may or may not matter except in terms of funding for a unified mission organization. I cannot imagine that we will dismantle the denominational structure just for the purpose of plundering district coffers.

I do not see the DS this way. I've never seen my DS across the years on a regular basis. When we do, he often preaches a pretty bland sermon, but nothing else happens. I believe we could get by with one DS per educational region to primarily help churches in crisis. Beyond that, I'm not sure the position is worth the multiplied millions it costs across just the USA.
That money could be better used by the local church and in our world mission efforts.

We also send the Dist. SS Chairperson, Dist. NYI Pres. and the Dist. NMI Pres. to mtgs. for them, all out of the pockets of the local church. In 32 yrs. of ministry I have not received on word of verbal or written repost from those my cong. helped send to these mtgs. Why send them if they do not come back and help all the churches on the dist. This is another area where I thing we could save and reduce costs to the local church. I have some more ideas, but some changes will never come in my lifetime. There are too many who would fight for the local churches to continue to fund their income when not much is produced to help the local church reach lost people.

[G R 'Scott' Cundiff]

I see that you are working off of Drury's comments while I have been working off of their denominational website: http://www.ub.org/clusters/index.html

It is Drury who suggests that a benefit of their restructuring might be that it would be more difficult to sue to denomination. They approach the entire restructuring as an effort to better minister to our culture.


It is possible that I read too much into this sentence, "The spate of sexual abuse suits is feeding some of this: in a centralized denomination when one pastor abuses a child the victim can sure “all the way to the top” trying to tap into the resources of districts and denominations. "

I assumed that "sure" was intended to be "sue."

[Ian Robertson]

So often, an idea is squashed before it is allowed to germinate. Any organization is dead in the water when it refuses to adjust its methods to meet the needs of the people it wants to serve.

Our new DS divided us into five clusters, with ours having 20 congregations. We see ourselves not as 20 churches, but as one parish that happens to operate in 20 different areas.

However, so far, the cluster leader has no authority and no budget. As long as we still have district zones, auxiliaries, boards, committees, training sessions, retreats, conferences, all we have done with clusters is add a new bureaucracy. I'm optimistic because this has been a top-down idea. I believe leaders are supposed to lead anyway. We cannot keep doing the same old things and expect different results.

I would enjoy being in a cluster of pastors who would do serious research into restructuring. Wouldn't it be thrilling to see more resources going into mission rather than maintenance? But this will take input from more than the old boys club. Having just (finally) read through G.A. resolutions, the focus is (in my humble opinion) on control and maintenance. But I believe we have younger minds and hearts full of passion who can lead us forward if we allow them.

[Hans Deventer]

Having just (finally) read through G.A. resolutions, the focus is (in my humble opinion) on control and maintenance. But I believe we have younger minds and hearts full of passion who can lead us forward if we allow them.

Very much my conclusion as well, Ian. And mostly out of fear.

I have some fears as well. Will this system keep those younger minds and hearts full of passion inside our church. Or will we get stuck with the control freaks?

[William Hunter]

Very much my conclusion as well, Ian. And mostly out of fear.

I have some fears as well. Will this system keep those younger minds and hearts full of passion inside our church. Or will get stuck with the control freaks?

I agree, Hans. In a post-modern culture we need to rethink some, how we do some things and not be afraid to let our gifted people to use all the creativeness in ministry that God has given them. I've become away of this in our missions area. We have a couple on our district, both of whom are ordained. He is from the USA and she from another country where her dad is a church planter and DS. She is very outgoing and a wonderful preacher. He is more on an administrator and planner. They make a good team. They were called to be missionaries but were denied because some with an old mindset that puts God in a box, felt the preacher's wife should be in the home and background and not the main preacher of the couple. What backwards thinking that is. It was a blessing for our disctrict in that they are planting a CTM and doing a great job. I fear we may lose our most gifted people if we do not get our leadership out of their old mindset power and control. That only hurts the church and keeps it from being all that God has in mind for it to be in the way He gifts His people. If we can could follow God's lead by looking at the minstry gifts of our clergy and laypeople, and then release people for ministry within our believe statement, our church could have some of its best growth ever.

[Carol Kane]

Hans, I aree with your question about retaining the young minds and hearts for mnistry with the fear of them leaving and us being stuck with the "Control freaks". I believe in our denomination, in view of the legislation that was just adpoted this past June, we will see toward the end of this 4 years a move to become more congregational, not compromising our doctrine but changing our methods. No more "good ol boys club or we always do it this way club". But this change must start with leadership first (I admit at first it may seem like those desiring change are swimming in the wrong flow of water), and trickle down through the church membership.

[Ian Robertson]

An earlier post said,

"A number of our larger churches would see no value in participation in "clusters" so they would become independent (aren't they self-sustaining now?) Why would Grove City, Denver First, Olathe College, Richmond Southside; York, Pa and such churches need to belong to a cluster?"

I must respectfully disagree. Grove City was cited. Attend a pastor's conference at Grove City and you will see an attitude of giving and sharing. The same is true of some of my friends whom God has trusted with large congregations.

As a cluster leader or coach, my heart's cry is to see God's Spirit poured out on all 20 congregations, to see 20 communities transformed by Divine love. I am joyfully in a cluster not for what I can GET out of it, but for what I can GIVE to others. I personally praise God for great pastors who mentored me when I started. In my case, it was Don Wellman, Bud Thompson, Bill Burch, and Jack Eyestone. At my age (68), I am indebted to others, and I want to pour the rest of my life into any teachable "Timothy."

I'm not waiting for someone to organize me into a cluster. I cluster every Thursday morning at 0700 (now that we're on a 24-hour clock), praying with a group of pastors who are also preparing for spiritual transformation throughout our community.

Come to think of it, I also cluster with a group of Nazarene pastors in Europe. We don't meet every Thursday but we use email, Skype, and the telephone. I hope they get something from me. I learn from them big time. One in Hungary is serious about planting ten new churches. The one in Greystones, Ireland, has an unbelievable outreach. He and his wife actually sang in a Roman Catholic Church in Dublin last month. (Please don't tell that in Northern Ireland.) I'm as excited about what God is doing through the Church of the Nazarene in Gdansk, Hajduhadhaz, Desertmartin and Sandpoint, as much as what He is doing in the congregation I happen to pastor.

After reading some posts, perhaps its still mostly true that "the only person who welcomes change is a wet baby." Merry Christmas and a happy New Year.

[Wesley Smith]

Restructuring could be of great benefit, but there is little in our current system to prevent a church from breaking out and becoming a church that dramatically impacts the surrounding community.

I've been a pastor for nearly 35 years. In the early days of my ministry groups of pastors would discuss the power of GS's and DS's to prevent creative ministry on the local level...Sunday School at a different time than usual, eliminating the Sunday night service, changing the name of the church, etc. We KNEW there was a narrow channel in which we could conduct our ministry due to the power of those above us.

Man, has that ever changed! There are very few innovations in local ministry that draw the attention and restrictiveness of those up the food chain.

What I hear most these days revolves around financial issues...if we did not have to pay out so much in franchise fees, we could really conduct a great local ministry. There is a certain amount of legitimacy to that complaint, but many of our churches have grown substantially while being completely cooperative with our budget system.

The one thing I'm pretty sure of is that growth all boils down to the vision of the local pastor and the support of local leadership.

That is NOT to say that restructuring wouldn't be good, that it is not necessary. No. No. No. It is, however, to say that our denomination could be more helpful in developing an organization that would be growth-oriented, but it hardly ever stands in the way of or prevents new/different ideas that result in growth. Those days are gone. MOST of the upline leaders I connect with in the church are longing for leaders at the local level to rise up and make the necessary changes to get out of maintenance and into growth.

Friend,

Wes

[William Hunter]

Restructuring could be of great benefit, but there is little in our current system to prevent a church from breaking out and becoming a church that dramatically impacts the surrounding community.

I've been a pastor for nearly 35 years. In the early days of my ministry groups of pastors would discuss the power of GS's and DS's to prevent creative ministry on the local level...Sunday School at a different time than usual, eliminating the Sunday night service, changing the name of the church, etc. We KNEW there was a narrow channel in which we could conduct our ministry due to the power of those above us.

Man, has that ever changed! There are very few innovations in local ministry that draw the attention and restrictiveness of those up the food chain.

What I hear most these days revolves around financial issues...if we did not have to pay out so much in franchise fees, we could really conduct a great local ministry. There is a certain amount of legitimacy to that complaint, but many of our churches have grown substantially while being completely cooperative with our budget system.

The one thing I'm pretty sure of is that growth all boils down to the vision of the local pastor and the support of local leadership.

That is NOT to say that restructuring wouldn't be good, that it is not necessary. No. No. No. It is, however, to say that our denomination could be more helpful in developing an organization that would be growth-oriented, but it hardly ever stands in the way of or prevents new/different ideas that result in growth. Those days are gone. MOST of the upline leaders I connect with in the church are longing for leaders at the local level to rise up and make the necessary changes to get out of maintenance and into growth.

Friend,

Wes

Wes, all that you say is true and the church I pastor is an example of just that. On the other hand, I think about what else we could do with the money taken out of our local church for district interests that really produce nothing to help my local church. And then there are literally multiplied millions of dollars in investment accounts to bring money into the district. Every penny of that money came out of local congregations. I have a problem with the huge amount my dist. as amassed in investment accounts, doing nothing in the way of ministry function. Yes, we need some there to assist churches that may go belly up, etc. but not at the amounts we now have.

Without such a large district budget we could expand our building for we have outgrown the new one and need more space. We could purchase some equipment that would help open up new minsitries for us---these are things we need, not just wants. We support our church, but it is not without knowing we are wasting money at the dist. and general levels. Yes, we are very much in need of some serious restructuring. While some pastors use budget payments as an excuse for not growing, we all know that is nonsense. But there are places that some of that money could be used in create additional ministries that would reach lost people. And again, there is all that money sitting in investments accounts and savings accounts for the dist. but then we hear too often that the dist. has no money. That, too, is nonsense. As I have sat on dist. boards and councils I have seen the financial reports and know better. But then, it will never happen in my life-time for there are those who do not want creative change and loss of power and control.

While I talk about some of this, I learned long ago to focus on my local church and pretty much ignore dist. and general stuff for it most often does nothing to help my local church. It has been years since I have participated in SS classes, etc., but I have one of the fastest growing SS on my dist., etc. The local church is everything and the dist. and gen. church needs to help it be all tha it can be, but top down stuff usually does not work no matter how much a person puts into it. We create ministries and outreaches that fit our local culture, etc. I agree with what you said, and also hope for a restructuring in some areas. Maybe my grandkids will see it.

[G R 'Scott' Cundiff]

In fairness, I now understand that the United Brethren in Christ denomination came close to merging with the Missionary Church, and it was only when that effort failed that this current restructuring took place. In other words, the denomination came close to closing completely, and, when that was rejected, they dramatically restructured by eliminating it's entire middle management.

That doesn't mean that their restructuring was a good or bad thing, but it was a second choice of the denomination's leadership.

Restructuring could be of great benefit, but there is little in our current system to prevent a church from breaking out and becoming a church that dramatically impacts the surrounding community.

Wes, I think you are right. Aside from sending off budget money, I feel less pressure to conform from the district level than I have ever felt in my 30+ years of ministry.

What I hear most these days revolves around financial issues...if we did not have to pay out so much in franchise fees, we could really conduct a great local ministry. There is a certain amount of legitimacy to that complaint, but many of our churches have grown substantially while being completely cooperative with our budget system.

I do think that there are expenses on all levels that should be reviewed. With our South Texas combination of districts and the new MS/LA shared DS approach, it seems that we may see a significant change in the role of DS in the near future. Personally, I think the jury is still out of whether it will be helpful or if we are going to actually end up creating a new level of management to support (DS + a level of assistants).

it (the denomination) hardly ever stands in the way of or prevents new/different ideas that result in growth. Those days are gone. MOST of the upline leaders I connect with in the church are longing for leaders at the local level to rise up and make the necessary changes to get out of maintenance and into growth.

I think you are right. Local approaches have been opened up to allow innovation. Now we are seeing, at least a little innovation at the district level. I am curious about whether we will see it happen at in more Manual level areas or not.

[Wesley Smith]

See what large letters I am using! The larger font enables me to type and see what I'm typing without the aid of reading glasses.

Anyway, I have, maybe, a "last word" (my, not the) to share on this subject. My personal opinion is that the Church of the Nazarene is on the same gentle downward slope following in the footsteps of the big name denominations. This evokes considerable sadness in me. So much so that I, being my own psycologist, have determined that I must transfer more of my emotions and mental energies to the success of my local church.

The sadness comes because I really believe that the Church of the Nazarene has a message, a family, and, a hope that this world desperately needs. Instead of increasing our influence and relevance, we are (in my humble opinion) opting for a sort of "whatever will be, will be" outcome. When I look around and see the magnificent leadership God has given to us, it causes indescribably wonderment and disbelief that we cannot come up with a plan and passion that will turn our heads and hearts towards a indescribably desirable future...a future that God's good Nazarene Christians would be willing to live for, give for and die for, if necessary!

If I could wave a magic wand over us, there are a three things I would very precisely target:

1. The youth of our Universities could have a HUGE impact on reviving and renewing our local congregations. The amazing talents of our University students are the best kept secret in the denomination, without a doubt. We have individuals and groups that should be cutting CDs and DVDs. We should be funding their ministries and embracing their ministries and their futures. Problem is...we don't even know who they are! Amazing. If I could wave a magic wand over this potential, I would conduct constant "talent/gifting" searches and I would invest whatever it takes to get these young people involved in the rebirth of local churches! Why not a yearly CD at our District Assemblies that features the best music and testimonies of our University students? It boggles my mind that we as a denomination have no sense of the value of these students. The horrible truth is that a huge percentage of our University students leave us and go into ministries that value their talents and gifts. Do I feel strongly about this? Well, my hands are trembling as I write this. What if 70% of our University students were graduating and then integrating into local, welcoming Nazarene Churches. That possibility alone would breath new life into our entire movement. Statistics I have seen from both SNU and PLNU indicate we are keeping somewhere around 25 to 30% of our University graduates. Absolutley sickening. But, to tell you the truth, if I was a graduating Nazarene University student, knowing what I know about how our denomination operates, I would look to another movement in which to invest my talents, energies and family.

2. There should/must be a nationwide internet 24/7 Nazarene inspirational broadcast. I do not know how to make this happen, but I do know there are people who are longing to use their technological talents for the Kingdom of God and for the Church of the Nazarene. Question...what is our "common connection" in our church. In my opinion, it used to be the Herald of Holiness. These days few people subscribe. I cannot point to our "watering hole" these days. A nationwide internet broadcast with Nazarene News, Nazarene Preachers, Nazarene Students, Nazarene Testimonies, Nazarene Miracles, Nazarene Children's and Youth broadcasts, & Etc., would create that "table fellowship" that is now nonexistant.

3. We are working on this, but we must put sensible, winsome witnessing materials in the hands of ALL of our people. This idea flows from my perception of our Nazarene Missions reading books. A few years ago I was contemplating the "purpose" of this exercise and it dawned on me that the point of reading those six books was dead-end. The ONLY external value is a possible reward (gold star, hot fudge sundae, etc.) on the local level and the honor of reporting to the District Assembly that we met our reading goal. Gross! All that time and energy has a black hole in outer space as its target. SO, drum roll, please,...let's have a reading book, a CD, a DVD that can be enjoyed and then passed to neighbors, friends, and strangers. This instrument is the most winsome message and testimony tool that God can inspire us to develop. The tag line at the end invites the listener to attend the local Nazarene Church, a church that makes a difference in individuals and families.

*****************8

Somewhere, somehow, we've got to find the dreamers amongst us and turn our future over to them. Managing "what is" as a primary focus should be repulsive to all of us. There are, as Russ Bredholt has told us, Wild Mustangs out there who could help us dream a new dream, excite our hearts about a new future and point us in the direction of cultural relevance!

I have seven years between now and retirement age (and I have no desire to retire). My commitment to God is that there is nothing in my possession that is not available to Him and to the Church of the Nazarene in order to see the turnaround we need.

This generation of pastors and lay leaders have more of everything at their disposal than at any time in the history of the church. It seems clear that without Divine intervention and a powerful human (Nazarene) response that we will casually descend the gentle slope to oblivion. HOWEVER, wherever there is faith and vision, that slope can reverse and head in an upward direction.

There is a bit of heresy in me. We've given ourselves to the message that people should "get saved, sanctified and go to heaven." My heresy is that we need a new indicator of how we determine that we are effective in our local ministries. I would add a column to our report, "How many people in my congregation have become people of...great faith?" We know full well how to bring people into cultural, complacent, Christianity. We are experts in that category. Over the years of my ministry, some of the greatest, most significant resistors of growth and relevance have been those who are saved, sanctified and going to heaven. God forbid that we do anything but evolve into and emerge as believers who are convinced that our God can do ANYTHING.

Like an arrow to my heart, "I tell you the truth, anyone who has faith in me will do what I have been doing. He will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father. And I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Son may bring glory to the Father. You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it." (John 14:12-14)

One more, "However, when the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on the earth?" (Luke 18:8)

In His Love,

Wes Smith

[Gary Swartzlander]

Interesting thoughts, well said. I'd love to have the opportunity to explore ideas with people in a group setting. We are a great denomination, sometimes we need to act like it.

[Ian Robertson]

Thomas Friedman in his new book, The World Is Flat, A Brief History of the Twenty-First Century, talks about three stages of globilization. "The dynamic force in Globilization 1.0 was countries globalizing... The dynamic force in Globilization 2.0 was companies globalizing... Around the year 2000 we entered a whole new era: Globilization 3.0 is shrinking the world from a size small to a size tiny and flattening the playing field at the same time... The thing that gives it its unique character is the newfound power for individuals to collaborate.

These are days of empowering individuals, of developing groups or clusters or associations of people who are drawn together by similar interests and passions. Hence, the Willow Creek Association and Rick Warren's "Global P.E.A.C.E. Plan." Pastors will likely replace denominational executives as the dynamic church leaders in the 21st Century.

The Internet provides a level playing field -- a flat world -- allowing multi-cultural, multi-lingual, and internation cooperation and sharing as never before. NazNet could be a great platform for serious dialog. However, in talking with some church leaders, I don't expect too many pastors under age 60 who would dare suggest radical reorganization for a denomination. Job security could be in jeopardy.

[Ann Smith]

I agree that the local congregation should hold deed to their buildings. I don't know if we need to do away with the DS position. However, I do think we need to eliminate the DS for life position. I like the Methodist system of limiting the term of a DS. Then they have to return to the pastorate.
Ann

[Hans Deventer]

The Internet provides a level playing field -- a flat world -- allowing multi-cultural, multi-lingual, and internation cooperation and sharing as never before. NazNet could be a great platform for serious dialog. However, in talking with some church leaders, I don't expect too many pastors under age 60 who would dare suggest radical reorganization for a denomination. Job security could be in jeopardy.

That might be problematic, for I presume we'll always have pastors in that age category.....

Sometimes, in all honesty, I wonder if didn't get things mixed up. I mean, we have "carier" missionaries. Strange word. Would Paul have considered his ministry like that? We have pastors with families, and who would deny them a family? But as you write, then different expectations and interests are creeping in. "Hey, it's okay for me to be spent, but what about my spouse and children? I want to be a good provider for them." All very understandable and yet, things do get mixed up.

[Billy Cox]

Keith Drury has a very interesting article on the resturcturing of the United Brethren in Christ: (http://www.ub.org/)

http://www.drurywriting.com/keith/reinventing.denomination.htm

"Such a restructuring is unlikely to ever “come from the grass roots” in a denomination."

So...here at the grass roots...we can talk about restructuring, but it ain't coming from us.

[William Hunter]

I fully believe in our Statement of Belief---it is soundly Biblical and offers the best hope for our world today. At the same time I am not so nieve as to think the way we do some things cannot be improved. I am not for the restructing the way this denomination mentioned at the start of the this thread has gone about it. They seem to have some serious problems. Yes, we could get that way without some changes being made. The latest thing that I find a bit irritating is the monthly report this month.

HQ is closed until Jan. 2---nobody there to receive any reports. But on Christmas Sunday all the churches on our district have to take the time to send in their Dev. attn. reports. Even the dist. office closed most of this time. Who is going to be there to receive it? This fits the usual sceme of things. Send in your money, say little, go along with the program, just maintain your numbers, and get those reports in---and you will be considered a good little pastor by the GS when he comes for Dist. Assm. Becasue of the closed offices I feel these reports could wait a couple of days, but common sense does not prevail often.

There are a list of things like this that need to change, but I agree with those who say it will not happen in our lifetime. My DS knows about it, but my ch. bd. divested itself of any responsibility for ministry fuctions of the church. They deal with buildings, budgets, grounds, administrative things, etc. And elected board does not necessarily have people with passion for different ministries on it. I hand picked my Vision Team, made up of people with a passion for ministry in the different areas we are doing ministry, and we stop, change, refine and create new ministries. I believe most pastors would not use this process for manipulation. The board is given a report but they seems to leave the minsitry areas up to the Vision Team. I have some passionate and creative people on this team who desperately want to see the church highly successful in outreach and conversion. The guidence of this team is much of the reason we are seeing such growth. The Manual outlines the use of a church board, but that is not always effective given that most boards I know of are not given to passion and creativeness for the various minsitries of the church. My ch. bd. meets for about one hour every other month. If something comes up we have a short mtg. after a service. My Vision Team meets for 2 2 1/2 hours every other month, and then they are not ready to go home when we close. That team has created a few sub-teams in various areas of the church and we are seeing whole new levels of excitement for children's church, SS, small groups etc. It seems to be working for based on our attn Christmas Sunday, we will report for the first time in this congregation's history, at least 100 in worship ave. for Dec. Since we can already figure SS for the month since we will not have SS this Sunday, our ave. for Dec. in SS is 111. This all started with only 28 people eight years ago. Much time had to be spent creating somethng besides a survival mentality in the congregation before we moved ahead, but here we are.

Some things denominationally do need to change, very much so. We have the right message for a post-modern society, we just need HQ to refine some things so that it is not a wrench in the gears, but a help to the local church. They say that is what they do, but petty little things like demanding reports at the dist. or general level when offices at those levels are not even open is petty nonsense.

My peeve for today.

[Wesley Smith]

William, you are obviously a motivated pastor/leader. Wish we could clone you! What you described in your post is a pretty good example of what is going on in much larger churches. THAT IS THE KEY! Do things like little churches and have little churches results. Find out what growing churches are doing. Do that. Enjoy much more fruitful results! Again, it takes a motivated/inspirational/growth-oriented/vision-driven pastor AND motivated/inspirational/growth-oriented/vision-driven lay people. Way to go/grow!

Friend,

Wes

[Hans Deventer]

"Such a restructuring is unlikely to ever “come from the grass roots” in a denomination."

So...here at the grass roots...we can talk about restructuring, but it ain't coming from us.

And neither will it come from the GA nor from the Board of General Superintendents. So who should it be coming from?

[William Hunter]

William, you are obviously a motivated pastor/leader. Wish we could clone you! What you described in your post is a pretty good example of what is going on in much larger churches. THAT IS THE KEY! Do things like little churches and have little churches results. Find out what growing churches are doing. Do that. Enjoy much more fruitful results! Again, it takes a motivated/inspirational/growth-oriented/vision-driven pastor AND motivated/inspirational/growth-oriented/vision-driven lay people. Way to go/grow!

Friend,

Wes

Wes, thanks for the kind and encouraging words. They are appreciated.

Now at 59 yrs. old I hit the floor in the morning with my blood flowing and excited about the day to serve God and lead a part of His Church. It is so neat to watch a discouraged congregation come alive with hope and expectancy. Somewhere along the way I learned that progress is the sum total of small victories, so I started here celebrating anything I could identify to celebrate as we entered our weekly worship. To some, those things did not seem like much, but any victory was a lift for such a discouraged people who had discussed how to give the church a respectable funeral before we came. It took some months, but gradually I sensed a new spirit of optimisim coming into my cong. thinking. It was almost microscopic to start with, but it was there. Right now I'm trying to train my leaders to think like and operate like we had 400 people here. When I retire in 6-8 yrs. I hope to leave behind a well organized for growth congregation of near 300. God has given me a vision and I try to gain insight from those who have grown churches to that level (not inherited them through pastoral moves).

Anyway, it is exciting and I am full of more excitement about pastoring than I have ever been. I seem surrounded at times by pastors who are just trying to coast to retirement for they are not able to seemingly gain the energy for truly leading a church to spiritual growth and numberical growth. I have such a passion for the existing church. We are told that the life cycle of a church is about 20 yrs, and then it begins the slow process of decline and death. I cannot accept that. God is very much alive and will use any cong. that will follow Him out into faith territory, take some risks, and put things in place that attract lost people to Him and His church. This cong. was in that downward cycle, but on our 40th anniv. we dedicated our new building on 10 1/2 acres of ground on the main highway coming into town, and we had 225 people there that day. I believe these are the greatest days in human history to be a Christian and be involved in a local church, and to be a pastor. Since our post-modern culture is very much like the culture of the first 300 years of the New Testament church, and during that time the church had its greatest growth ever, we ought to be excited; done right, these days could be the greatest days of church growth since the beginning of the New Testament church. As my teens would say, this realization "flips my switch!"

[Billy Cox]

Exactly... That's why I am not betting the rent money on a major restructuring of the Nazarene Church happening anytime soon. (besides that betting the rent money could cost me my credentials and upset my wife)

It can only come for the GS's, and short of a major crisis there is not enough consensus among them to do anything radical.

[Wesley Smith]

Wes, thanks for the kind and encouraging words. They are appreciated.

Now at 59 yrs. old I hit the floor in the morning with my blood flowing and excited about the day to serve God and lead a part of His Church. It is so neat to watch a discouraged congregation come alive with hope and expectancy. Somewhere along the way I learned that progress is the sum total of small victories, so I started here celebrating anything I could identify to celebrate as we entered our weekly worship. To some, those things did not seem like much, but any victory was a lift for such a discouraged people who had discussed how to give the church a respectable funeral before we came. It took some months, but gradually I sensed a new spirit of optimisim coming into my cong. thinking. It was almost microscopic to start with, but it was there. Right now I'm trying to train my leaders to think like and operate like we had 400 people here. When I retire in 6-8 yrs. I hope to leave behind a well organized for growth congregation of near 300. God has given me a vision and I try to gain insight from those who have grown churches to that level (not inherited them through pastoral moves).

Anyway, it is exciting and I am full of more excitement about pastoring than I have ever been. I seem surrounded at times by pastors who are just trying to coast to retirement for they are not able to seemingly gain the energy for truly leading a church to spiritual growth and numberical growth. I have such a passion for the existing church. We are told that the life cycle of a church is about 20 yrs, and then it begins the slow process of decline and death. I cannot accept that. God is very much alive and will use any cong. that will follow Him out into faith territory, take some risks, and put things in place that attract lost people to Him and His church. This cong. was in that downward cycle, but on our 40th anniv. we dedicated our new building on 10 1/2 acres of ground on the main highway coming into town, and we had 225 people there that day. I believe these are the greatest days in human history to be a Christian and be involved in a local church, and to be a pastor. Since our post-modern culture is very much like the culture of the first 300 years of the New Testament church, and during that time the church had its greatest growth ever, we ought to be excited; done right, these days could be the greatest days of church growth since the beginning of the New Testament church. As my teens would say, this realization "flips my switch!"

Dear People,

Take William's post and absorb it and share it. Pure gold! Find something to celebrate, no matter how small it is! That congregation is coming to life and I fully expect Pastor William's dream/vision to come true by his retirement. AND, I pray that it may be so!

Made my day!

Friend,

Wes