Adolescent Movement

[Charles W Christian]

My friend and our fellow-Naznetter Craig Laughlin made an interesting (and in my mind, helpful) comment on a now closed thread that I would like to explore. He mentioned that the CotN is in many ways in its adolescence as a denomination, and in the broad context of Christian history, that seems to ring true. He goes on to say that, like most adolescents, we tend to sometimes view older voices as if they are not as enlightened as us, and we also tend to be wary of authority, etc.

Again, I'm paraphrasing Craig here a bit, but I think this is an accurate observation. I also think that our relative youth as a denomination, along with our comparatively small size, often leads to some "rookie mistakes" or misjudgements. At times, this has led to making reactive choices out of fear (e.g., fear that we will "lose" people, etc.) rather than out of mission and vision. What lessons have we learned or can we learn, if this is the case, that will help us move toward greater maturity as a denomination? Also, what mature voices have, in your opinion, guided us and continue to guide us through these times?

Blessings,
Charles

[Roy Richardson]

Voices that Guide us:

1. Scripture still needs to be the benchmark. If it is not clear on the issue, then the good old Quadrangle is a good tool.
2. The Holy Spirit - sort of a 1a to Scripture in my book.
3. The older denominations with whom we share a history - e.g. the Anglican Church and the Methodists. We can still learn much from them - both positive and negative information - if we are willing to pay attention. The rebirth of the Anglican movement here in the US is interesting to watch, and I suspect a similar movement will be birthed soon within Methodism.

Lessons to be learned.

1. Spiritual arrogance will lead to nothing good. When we think that our theology and way of "doing church" is all that and a bag of chips, we are on some very shaky ground. I am encouraged by the more ecumenical nature I see in some of our pastors and leaders. It is an encouraging sign.
2. Form cannot supercede function. Too many of us are still fighting the last war with its forms and weapons. It is equivalent to a Civil War formation battle going up against machine guns. The world has changed dramatically in recent years, and we are closer to the 1st Century church situation than we are the 19th or early 20th Century Church situation. We have to acknowledge that and proceed in the world we live in, not the one we wish we lived in.

Those are my thoughts.

[Shea Zellweger]

3. The older denominations with whom we share a history - e.g. the Anglican Church and the Methodists. We can still learn much from them - both positive and negative information - if we are willing to pay attention. The rebirth of the Anglican movement here in the US is interesting to watch, and I suspect a similar movement will be birthed soon within Methodism.


I think we'd be remiss to not include the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Traditions in that list, with whom we share quite a bit of history, and who provided much of the basis for John Wesley's own theology. I realize there's much contention over this, but we can't ignore the fact that until the last 25% of the history of Christianity, all theologians- both good and bad- belonged to one of those two groups (or both, before the schism).

[Dale Cozby]

My grandfather was a murderer, abusive, harsh, and generally a hard drinker. As a result my father was raised by and adopted by his brother and wife. Over time, he left the ways of his father and tried not to be like him.
I think it would be remiss if we did not look at the errors of those who have gone on before us and the reasons we became a denomination in the first place.

[John Reilly]

I think we'd be remiss to not include the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Traditions in that list, with whom we share quite a bit of history, and who provided much of the basis for John Wesley's own theology. I realize there's much contention over this, but we can't ignore the fact that until the last 25% of the history of Christianity, all theologians- both good and bad- belonged to one of those two groups (or both, before the schism).

I agree with Shea's comment. I agree as a Denomination we are in adolescence, even more closely perhaps to preteen grades 5 and 6. I am thankful our manual begins with an historical statement that connect us to the historical church by declaring that we embrace all of the creeds of the early church up through AD 500. In our maturity we have wisdom enough to embrace the Doctrine of Christology affirmed by the Council of Chalcedon. Our immaturity is highlighted by a less formed theology over baptism as a result there is an inconsistent practice concerning baptism of infants and rebaptism of adults. Wesley helps us with this with the Renewal of Baptismal Vows service. Also a conversation concerning confirmation seems timely towards some theology embracing a spiritual practice that celebrates a learning process of sanctification and a rite of passage to celebrate the witness and experience of sanctification. As we mature as a denomination our people will need a renewal of experience of holy living and a practical expression and practice of holiness to replace the waning practices of camp meeting revivals and traveling evangelists holding revivals in local churches. As Nazarenes struggle to maintain their identity as holiness people we will need to embrace some Wesleyan spiritual practice that helps us testify and witness to the experience of sanctification and heart holiness.

[Roy Richardson]

I think we'd be remiss to not include the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Traditions in that list, with whom we share quite a bit of history, and who provided much of the basis for John Wesley's own theology. I realize there's much contention over this, but we can't ignore the fact that until the last 25% of the history of Christianity, all theologians- both good and bad- belonged to one of those two groups (or both, before the schism).

I agree. That was an error of omission on my part.

[Charles W Christian]

My grandfather was a murderer, abusive, harsh, and generally a hard drinker. As a result my father was raised by and adopted by his brother and wife. Over time, he left the ways of his father and tried not to be like him.
I think it would be remiss if we did not look at the errors of those who have gone on before us and the reasons we became a denomination in the first place.

That's the kind of balance we're going for, hopefully. On the one hand, we cannot throw out entire families/households because of one or a few bad apples. On the other hand, we pray that the good reasons for being a new group will bear fruit.

Perhaps your grandfather was "all bad", and so your father was right in moving completely away from him and his ways. I don't see the historic Catholic or Orthodox churches as being "all bad," although there was of course some "bad" in them, even according to their own leaders and theologians. Likewise, I see much good in groups like the Methodists and Anglicans, etc. So they were not as corrupt as the description of your grandfather, and therefore, would have some areas where we can connect (apparently, unlike your grandfather, may God bless him).

So, that is the big focus of the question....

CWC

[John Kennedy]

I somehow think it's fitting that, on my screen at least, the 'adolescent' and 'conservative/progressive' threads have wound up in close proximity to one another. The developmental stages that the church has gone through (and is going through) have been fascinating to observe.

Although I've been out of the denomination for nearly 40 years, I've always had an interest in Nazarene history and have attempted to remain conversant with the changes taking place within it. After all, growing up in a Nazarene parsonage had a great deal to do with what I would consider to be my spiritual formation.

I had not thought of the church's journey as much in terms of developmental stages such as infancy, adolescence, etc. as in seeing it move along a continuum from diffidence to self-assuredness. The church I grew up in seemed, at times, to be somewhat insecure. There was an almost palpable fear that there would be too much change too quickly (and in some quarters any change at all was too much).

The late 50's secession seemed to almost result in a tightening up - somehow the denomination had to reassure those who remained that the church was right where it had been for 50 years. I was acquainted with a very well-known Nazarene evangelist in those years who was very concerned that the church would cease to be a movement and become more 'churchly'.

He believed strongly that the church's message and methods of its delivery were inseperable/identical. You couldn't have one without the other. Stop having 10 day and 2 week revivals twice a year and you might as well post 'Ichabod' over the door of the church (and that was the phrase he used). A lot of Nazarenes were in full agreement with that idea.

I remember a CST course called "Shining Lights on Sunday Nights" that made it unmistakably clear that having a lively Sunday night service was a significant indicator of a church's spiritual vitality. As far as I've been able to determine, that is an idea that has gone by the the boards.

There have been a number of factors that have played a significant role in the church's movement along the continuum. Two that immediately come to mind would be the role played by Nazarene higher ed and opportunities for dialogue and free exchange of ideas on forums such as Naznet.

The above observations are, admittedly, from someone outside looking in. However I think I have a fairly good idea of the layout of the house.

[Billy Cox]

My friend and our fellow-Naznetter Craig Laughlin made an interesting (and in my mind, helpful) comment on a now closed thread that I would like to explore. He mentioned that the CotN is in many ways in its adolescence as a denomination, and in the broad context of Christian history, that seems to ring true. He goes on to say that, like most adolescents, we tend to sometimes view older voices as if they are not as enlightened as us, and we also tend to be wary of authority, etc.

I don't think that we can use the terms 'movement' and 'denomination' interchangeably as this thread seems to be doing. I could buy the idea that the denomination is in its adolescence, maybe...but the movement from which the Church of the Nazarene came had already passed middle age when a bunch of holiness groups came together at Pilot Point in hopes of keeping the good times rolling.

Present-day discussions of the holiness movement are like great grandchildren gathering at a gravesite, arguing about their ancestor's legacy/heritage.


Again, I'm paraphrasing Craig here a bit, but I think this is an accurate observation. I also think that our relative youth as a denomination, along with our comparatively small size, often leads to some "rookie mistakes" or misjudgements. At times, this has led to making reactive choices out of fear (e.g., fear that we will "lose" people, etc.) rather than out of mission and vision. What lessons have we learned or can we learn, if this is the case, that will help us move toward greater maturity as a denomination? Also, what mature voices have, in your opinion, guided us and continue to guide us through these times?

I'm not sure that institutional fear is a function of youth. Amateurism, perhaps, but not fear.

[Charles W Christian]

Billy -
I'm thinking in comparison to the RCC, Orthodox, and even early Reformation movements. 100 is only 5% of 2000....

Also, institutional fear is not always simply a function of youth. But, I am arguing that is our case, it often is. Our small size is probably more contributive to this than our age, though.

CWC

[Billy Cox]

Billy -
I'm thinking in comparison to the RCC, Orthodox, and even early Reformation movements. 100 is only 5% of 2000....

Also, institutional fear is not always simply a function of youth. But, I am arguing that is our case, it often is. Our small size is probably more contributive to this than our age, though.

Yes, I figured that the life stage metaphor was dependent on chronological age. So let's run with that metaphor a moment. Of course, if it is indeed true that the RCC is 2000 years old (which is quite dubious) then the CotN is an infant, not an adolescent.

Developmental stages are typically correlated with what one is doing or what one is struggling to accomplish at various times of life, and are only loosely correlated with choronological age.

I would thus suggest that every denomination born out of schism (or excommunication) starts off in young adulthood...asserting independence from one's parent. The life stage analogy also breaks down when denominations that should be geriatric or dead seem to be 69 and holding. Can you think of a denomination that has simply ceased to exist. I can't.

[Dale Cozby]

I think seeing us as a child before our more mature elders isn't as helpful as seeing us as an evolution of the same organism...the Church. With each new redefining effort the church seeks to be more like Christ than it's predecessor. I know some may not like the anaology, but the church is more like a computer operating system.

So that which makes the earlier generations of the church like Christ is good. Maybe we are more like the "Church version 7.2" than a wet behind the ears snot nose kid that doesn't know much and acts foolishly before its elders.

I still have an old computer running Windows 95, and another I use on XP, but I prefer windows 7. Hey I even own an original Nintendo but it isn't hooked up and sits in a box in a closet.Oh and my 95 computer is really buggy and loc ks up sometimes.

[Billy Cox]

My friend and our fellow-Naznetter Craig Laughlin made an interesting (and in my mind, helpful) comment on a now closed thread that I would like to explore. He mentioned that the CotN is in many ways in its adolescence as a denomination, and in the broad context of Christian history, that seems to ring true. He goes on to say that, like most adolescents, we tend to sometimes view older voices as if they are not as enlightened as us, and we also tend to be wary of authority, etc.

What I hear behind the assertion that the CotN is in its adolescence is the hope (pipe dream?) that the denomination's best days are still ahead of it. I suppose that it could be true if one thinks in categories other than religious marketshare and gross revenue.

[Hans Deventer]

I suppose that it could be true if one thinks in categories other than religious marketshare and gross revenue.

Seems like our Master didn't think in those categories either.

[Cynthia Prentice]

My friend and our fellow-Naznetter Craig Laughlin made an interesting (and in my mind, helpful) comment on a now closed thread that I would like to explore. He mentioned that the CotN is in many ways in its adolescence as a denomination, and in the broad context of Christian history, that seems to ring true. He goes on to say that, like most adolescents, we tend to sometimes view older voices as if they are not as enlightened as us, and we also tend to be wary of authority, etc.

Again, I'm paraphrasing Craig here a bit, but I think this is an accurate observation. I also think that our relative youth as a denomination, along with our comparatively small size, often leads to some "rookie mistakes" or misjudgements. At times, this has led to making reactive choices out of fear (e.g., fear that we will "lose" people, etc.) rather than out of mission and vision. What lessons have we learned or can we learn, if this is the case, that will help us move toward greater maturity as a denomination? Also, what mature voices have, in your opinion, guided us and continue to guide us through these times?

Blessings,
Charles

It seems that often times when a new generation makes changes...especially when they are correcting real or perceived errors of the previous generation...it seems that often times in order to correct error the new generation jumps to an extreme. Then later...their descendants, in order to compensate, often times jump to another extreme. It is rare that error is corrected by moving to the middle. For example, a child raised by an abusive parent may overcompensate and when they grow up they may adopt an extremely passive parenting style. Their child may then overcompensate by being too rigid when they themselves become a parent.

It seems that the most difficult change to make is one that falls somewhere in the middle...without the reactive leap to the extreme. I know this is something we are trying to keep in mind as our church moves forward in directions that are new for us.

[Roy Richardson]

It seems that often times when a new generation makes changes...especially when they are correcting real or perceived errors of the previous generation...it seems that often times in order to correct error the new generation jumps to an extreme. Then later...their descendants, in order to compensate, often times jump to another extreme. It is rare that error is corrected by moving to the middle. For example, a child raised by an abusive parent may overcompensate and when they grow up they may adopt an extremely passive parenting style. Their child may then overcompensate by being too rigid when they themselves become a parent.

It seems that the most difficult change to make is one that falls somewhere in the middle...without the reactive leap to the extreme. I know this is something we are trying to keep in mind as our church moves forward in directions that are new for us.

The trick is to make gradual change that keeps you on the right path. With any change, there is friction and resistance, and getting through that resistance without blowing the place up. As much as there are pastors and people who want to throw the baby out with the bathwater, there are people whose favorite hymn is "we shall not be moved." That clash, however incremental the change, goes on every day in our churches, and it grieves God. The church has to change its approach or it will become an anachronism. We don't have to change the message at all, but the delivery system and other accoutrements might need to be altered, depending on the local context.

This is where we need to rely on the Holy Spirit on both sides, and not on our preferences and tradition alone. Sadly, I see more of that than reliance on the Holy Spirit.

[Jonathan Hooker]

What does a fully grown/mature denomination look like? Why can't a denomination be mature at 50 years or 100 years old? Maturity doesn't have anything to do with age but rather a state of the heart.

I have been married for a little over a year now and everyone keeps calling my wife and I still in the honeymoon stage of marriage as though we are still starstruck lovers that don't see each other realistically or life realistically. I look to Scripture and wonder what Christ really meant when he said to let the little children come to him for their's is the kingdom of heaven and again unless you become like a little child you will never see the kingdom of heaven. I like to think that the relationship that I share with my wife that is outwardly characterized as the "honeymoon stage" is right where it should stay. Does this mean that we don't mature in the way we relate to each other or the ways we express our relationship? Not at all. Rather, we show our maturity in they ways we live out our life especially when people view our simple love for each other and trust in each other as the "honeymoon stage". I pray that this stage lasts our entire lives! :-)

I think the same is applicable for the church. We are always learning how to be more Christlike and how to be more relevant to our culture, but the youthfullness of our denomination should never come into play as an excuse to not always think of ways to be relevant to our culture. Will we make mistakes? Absolutely. I hope we never stop. Will we have misjudgements? Sure. But who cares? We must continue to get up and learn from our mistakes and the mistakes of others but lets also not forget that it is our child-like views of Christ and Scripture that makes us unique and we must do everything within our power to keep it. The danger with becoming as "mature" as organizations like the Catholic denomination and other older denominations is that we become stale and luke-warm. I would hope that our denomination will always keep a youthful view of itself because it spurs us on to new ideas and ways to engage and reach an ever-changing culture with the Gospel of Jesus Christ something that to me has seemed to be lacking in many "older" denominations.

JH

P.S. I'm new... Please don't hurt me!!! :-)

[Charles W Christian]

What does a fully grown/mature denomination look like? Why can't a denomination be mature at 50 years or 100 years old? Maturity doesn't have anything to do with age but rather a state of the heart.

I have been married for a little over a year now and everyone keeps calling my wife and I still in the honeymoon stage of marriage as though we are still starstruck lovers that don't see each other realistically or life realistically. I look to Scripture and wonder what Christ really meant when he said to let the little children come to him for their's is the kingdom of heaven and again unless you become like a little child you will never see the kingdom of heaven. I like to think that the relationship that I share with my wife that is outwardly characterized as the "honeymoon stage" is right where it should stay. Does this mean that we don't mature in the way we relate to each other or the ways we express our relationship? Not at all. Rather, we show our maturity in they ways we live out our life especially when people view our simple love for each other and trust in each other as the "honeymoon stage". I pray that this stage lasts our entire lives! :-)

I think the same is applicable for the church. We are always learning how to be more Christlike and how to be more relevant to our culture, but the youthfullness of our denomination should never come into play as an excuse to not always think of ways to be relevant to our culture. Will we make mistakes? Absolutely. I hope we never stop. Will we have misjudgements? Sure. But who cares? We must continue to get up and learn from our mistakes and the mistakes of others but lets also not forget that it is our child-like views of Christ and Scripture that makes us unique and we must do everything within our power to keep it. The danger with becoming as "mature" as organizations like the Catholic denomination and other older denominations is that we become stale and luke-warm. I would hope that our denomination will always keep a youthful view of itself because it spurs us on to new ideas and ways to engage and reach an ever-changing culture with the Gospel of Jesus Christ something that to me has seemed to be lacking in many "older" denominations.

JH

P.S. I'm new... Please don't hurt me!!! :-)

This makes sense, and it is indeed an answer to the original question regarding what we can learn from other groups -- positively and negatively. We can learn to keep our vitality and "youth" as a movement in such a way that it is refreshing and not stagnant. On the other hand, like a growing marriage relationship, we can recognize qualities in older relationships that we want to benefit from in the days to come.

I also agree that youth does not necessarily mean "immature," but most youths are in some ways immature. This is, in my opinion, true for the CotN.

And Billy: there are numerous denominations that don't exist anymore, and still others that don't exist in their original form.

CWC

[Billy Cox]

And Billy: there are numerous denominations that don't exist anymore, and still others that don't exist in their original form.

Can you name one denomination with 1 million or more members that ceased to exist for any reason besides merger?

[Rich Schmidt]

Can you think of a denomination that has simply ceased to exist. I can't.


Can you name one denomination with 1 million or more members that ceased to exist for any reason besides merger?

Does this mean you can only think of denominations with 1 million or more members? :D

[Wes Smith]

Can you name one denomination with 1 million or more members that ceased to exist for any reason besides merger?

I can't, but my observation is that many denominations have basically ceased to exist though they do not know it. The downward slide of major denominations could be described as...dead men/women walking.

This is a fascinating thread and I am instructed by the various opinions. I really hope my estimation is wrong, but adolescence is not a term I would use to describe us. Mine would be something like "approaching terminally ill."

If I could show some kind of sequence into this terminal illness it would include the death or near death of things that brought us together in years gone by. A good example would be the demise of the Herald of Holiness and Holiness today. Not saying that a healthy publication in all our Nazarene homes is the remedy for terminality, but I am saying that we are missing a denomination-wide watering trough where Nazarenes gather for friendship, information and inspiration. Another example would be the diversity of Sunday School and other materials used by local Nazarene Churches. There was a day when a very high percentage of local Nazarene churches used Nazarene educational material across the board. AND, I'm not saying we should particularly return to that.

But I do say that we need something that informs Nazarenes around the world regarding our mission and doctrine and purpose and progress and leadership and the various facets of uniqueness and spiritual and social nourishment in and throughout the Church of the Nazarene.

Friend,

Wes

[Hans Deventer]

But I do say that we need something that informs Nazarenes around the world regarding our mission and doctrine and purpose and progress and leadership and the various facets of uniqueness and spiritual and social nourishment in and throughout the Church of the Nazarene.

Friend,

Wes

Perhaps that's called Work & Witness?

[Billy Cox]

Does this mean you can only think of denominations with 1 million or more members? :D

Haha... Well, I wanted to limit the scope of the definition to 'real' denominations and not some rag-tag collection of affiliated churches that is unknown outside of southeastern West Virginia. You know...like one of those splinters off of a splinter off of a miscellaneous Baptist splinter group. :sigh:

In short, saying that denominations are here today and gone tomorrow is bunk.

[Billy Cox]

If I could show some kind of sequence into this terminal illness it would include the death or near death of things that brought us together in years gone by. A good example would be the demise of the Herald of Holiness and Holiness today. Not saying that a healthy publication in all our Nazarene homes is the remedy for terminality, but I am saying that we are missing a denomination-wide watering trough where Nazarenes gather for friendship, information and inspiration. Another example would be the diversity of Sunday School and other materials used by local Nazarene Churches. There was a day when a very high percentage of local Nazarene churches used Nazarene educational material across the board. AND, I'm not saying we should particularly return to that.

But I do say that we need something that informs Nazarenes around the world regarding our mission and doctrine and purpose and progress and leadership and the various facets of uniqueness and spiritual and social nourishment in and throughout the Church of the Nazarene.

These are fair points. I question whether the indicators mentioned - decline of the denominational magazine(s), lack of brand loyalty in curriculum - are a sign that vitality is lost, or whether the CotN is simply less defined by sectarianism or exceptionalism. I also am not quick to assign a good/bad to that state of affairs.

As an example, I am very optimistic about the CotN as an international religious presence, but I am pessimistic about the qualification of the North American leadership to do anything beyond trying to contain and minimize anything that dilutes their power and control. Call me cynical, but I'll simply point out that the BGS is a reflection of how 'we' see ourselves, and it's grossly out of sync with reality.