Alterations to the Covenant of Christian Conduct

[Roy Richardson]

Over in the dancing thread, the suggestion has been made that the Covenant of Christian Conduct be repealed and replaced with a more generic statement of living a God-honoring lifestyle. If that were to happen, how would you respond?

FYI - the first two are not the same question. The first one does not assume you are currently abiding by the CCC.

[Dan Henderson]

I'm surmising here. A large part of human nature is both/and, not wanting to be told what to do and wanting a clear understanding of what we are supposed toi be doing.

The CCC provides for that need we have to be told what to do. How can we rebel otherwise.

[Jim Franklin]

If its not broke no need to fix it.

[Bob Hunter]

If its not broke no need to fix it.

It's broke when people blatantly ignore it and it becomes the butt end of jokes. I mean, it's come a long ways, but we have to do better.

[Jim Chabot]

It took me a couple hours to think it through. While my first thought was to check the first box, in the end I realize that for me it would be the beginning of the end. I'm guessing that most folks in my local church would go on as if nothing had changed. Eventually though, I think that we would end up like the Methodists not really believing in anything to the extent that we are willing and wanting that our lives would be different. What would be next? Drinking? I wouldn't want to be part of a church that is affected by our culture, I'm drawn to holiness to be a part of a church that lives outside culture.

[Bob Hunter]

What would be next? Drinking?

Jesus turned water into ______________?

What was in the cup at the Last Supper?

Welch's grape juice has only been around since 1869. It was unfermented for the sole purpose of a Church communion service. What was used in the pre-Welch era?

Not endorsing alcohol consumption, I'm just making an observation.

[Jim Chabot]

It's broke when people blatantly ignore it and it becomes the butt end of jokes. I mean, it's come a long ways, but we have to do better.

I don't believe that the code is broken Bob. Rather I believe we have become too lax in who we ordain and who we allow to retain their credentials. We need elders whom we can trust, and who lead by example, we need elders who are sold out to personal holiness. I worry that we are already on a slippery slope.

Especially how we regard drinking. We are a product of the temperance movement, we cannot serve those who's lives have been disrupted and destroyed by alcohol or drugs if we are tainted ourselves. And dancing? We need to dance? Personally I cannot comprehend how these piddling little things that we voluntarily abstain from can actually be an issue for some. I try not to think about these influences, it gets depressing.

[Jim Chabot]

Jesus turned water into ______________?

What was in the cup at the Last Supper?

Welch's grape juice has only been around since 1869. It was unfermented for the sole purpose of a Church communion service. What was used in the pre-Welch era?

Not endorsing alcohol consumption, I'm just making an observation.

And this is a fair observation. Jesus turned water into wine, it was wine that was in the cup, and yes I believe that it was fermented.

I think that we realize that drinking isn't sinful unless it leads to drunkenness. It is a stumbling block to others, we should be a safe haven for those who are alcoholics, we should care enough to abstain. I believe that this is foundational to holiness people, this is part of our dna.

[Paul DeBaufer]

It took me a couple hours to think it through. While my first thought was to check the first box, in the end I realize that for me it would be the beginning of the end. I'm guessing that most folks in my local church would go on as if nothing had changed. Eventually though, I think that we would end up like the Methodists not really believing in anything to the extent that we are willing and wanting that our lives would be different. What would be next? Drinking? I wouldn't want to be part of a church that is affected by our culture, I'm drawn to holiness to be a part of a church that lives outside culture.

So, God's commands aren't enough? Not adequate to keep people on track? Need the laws of men to do that? I am pretty sure the New Testament addresses this, but I could be wrong.

[Jim Chabot]

So, God's commands aren't enough? Not adequate to keep people on track? Need the laws of men to do that? I am pretty sure the New Testament addresses this, but I could be wrong.

It's not about keeping people on track, not at all. It is about definition, it's about a fellowship of like minded people. People who read these rules and rejoice, people who are glad to be free from the worldly influences that this code helps keep us from.

In regard to the drinking issue, yes we have His instruction as well. We are to abstain if there exists a possibility that we could cause others to sin.

[Craig Laughlin]

Okay, who gets to tell Jesus he needs to do a little work on his lifestyle before we can allow him to be a part of the church of the Nazarene? Rumor has it he occasionally drank socially.

[Paul DeBaufer]

It's not about keeping people on track, not at all. It is about definition, it's about a fellowship of like minded people. People who read these rules and rejoice, people who are glad to be free from the worldly influences that this code helps keep us from.

In regard to the drinking issue, yes we have His instruction as well. We are to abstain if there exists a possibility that we could cause others to sin.

Then make it a statement of definitions rather than a set of rules. When pastors are coached to not give membership to those who do not meet the criteria in the CCC then you have man made laws. Laws that keep people out, must earn your membership in the church by holding to the law, Hmmmm. As definitions that are not enforced as rules then I'd have no problem with them.

What do we do with Matthew 11:19 (and Luke's parallel) "the Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, “Look, a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax-collectors and sinners!” "? Jesus seems to be saying He drinks and to such an extent that people think Him a drunkard.

[Billy Cox]

Okay, who gets to tell Jesus he need to do a little work on his lifestyle before we can allow him to be a part of the church of the Nazarene? Rumor has it he occasionally drank socially.

Maybe we're doomed by the fact that the 1st century Nazarenes were the first to reject Jesus.

[Bob Hunter]

In regard to the drinking issue, yes we have His instruction as well. We are to abstain if there exists a possibility that we could cause others to sin.

Then I would have to quit doing a lot of things. No more rock music, apple pie, cable TV, sports, etc.

I am just saying the possibility always exist that we might cause another to sin. We simply can't live in a vacuum. I think we have to do what we can to be sure we are not intentionally standing in someone's way.

[Dan Henderson]

Okay, who gets to tell Jesus he needs to do a little work on his lifestyle before we can allow him to be a part of the church of the Nazarene? Rumor has it he occasionally drank socially.

I don't see any proof text for that claim. However, I have it on good authority that he was a supplier ....

[Pete Vecchi]

I don't believe that the code is broken Bob. Rather I believe we have become too lax in who we ordain and who we allow to retain their credentials. We need elders whom we can trust, and who lead by example, we need elders who are sold out to personal holiness. I worry that we are already on a slippery slope.

Especially how we regard drinking. We are a product of the temperance movement, we cannot serve those who's lives have been disrupted and destroyed by alcohol or drugs if we are tainted ourselves. And dancing? We need to dance? Personally I cannot comprehend how these piddling little things that we voluntarily abstain from can actually be an issue for some. I try not to think about these influences, it gets depressing.

I am an ordained elder. I do not drink alcohol. I have very little desire to dance. I live these things in my life. At the same time, it is difficult for me at times as a pastor to tell people who live in the culture why a Christian should totally abstain from alcohol and dancing. Can there be (and are there) good arguments to be made as to why people should abstain from those things? Absolutely. But I think it is a stretch to try to tell people who don't abuse alcohol that in order to be a Christian they must abstain from all alcohol and back that up directly from the Bible (yes, we can get into the issues of not doing anything that might cause other people to stumble, but then we could start bringing into the equation that eating a candy bar might cause a diabetic to stumble, so we should abstain from all candy out of a sense of love and concern for others--just to name one thing).

It seems to me that Paul said in Romans 14 that we should accept one another without passing judgment on disputable matters, and that each person will stand or fall to his/her own master.

[Pete Vecchi]

The point is that no matter what, we'll never please everybody--not even everybody within the Church of the Nazarene.

[Dan Henderson]

Our CCC applies to our conduct as Nazarenes not necessarily to our conduct as Christians. Though I am inclined to adhere to all of them. Rationale. They have been well thought out. One example, our social stance regarding alcohol consumtion is profound. It was developed while observing how achoholism affects family and society. If you are part of the 1% or less of our population who are able to control their consumption, more power to ya', though I would automatically doubt anyone of you two tells me that you are in control as that statemet is an early indicator that you are not.

I'm not one of those people. I know I have to abtain from things that can become easily compuslive.

I've also seen, 1st hand, the devistation this largely uncontrollable habit has on members of my family. In just this one of our CCC statements, I have seen devistating results. All things are permissible, not all things are beneficial. We have not ben called to go through life and figure out everything individually, we have a community.

In the thread on dancing, we are quickly moving to the discussion of if dancing is okay, then what type? Blah! The entire topic is a distractor. It gets us off our game. And as much as I hate to admit it, the ones who think we shouldn't go to movies are probably closer to being right than I am.

[Benjamin Burch]

I don't see any proof text for that claim. However, I have it on good authority that he was a supplier ....

Whenever people make statements about how being a Christian and being a bartender are a little odd together, I always tell them that I'm following the example Jesus set.

Interesting thing about that narrative... Jesus is serving wine to people who are already intoxicated!!!

[Dan Henderson]

Interesting thing about that narrative... Jesus is serving wine to people who are already intoxicated!!!

I wasn't going to go there but I cannot, in good conscience, disagree here ...

[Mike Schutz]

Thanks. I was looking for a new illustration for my motto: a wise man does not attend every fight to which he receives an invitation.

Then there's: A wise man teaches modesty, a foolish man legislates it.

[Craig Laughlin]

Then there's: A wise man teaches modesty, a foolish man legislates it.

This is the reason to not have rules but warnings about things we see as dangerous. I find a conversation about the dangers associated with xyz is vastly more effective at changing behavior than simply restricting the behavior.

[Mike Schutz]

Then there's: A wise man teaches modesty, a foolish man legislates it.

In case you don't understand the wisdom here, just talk to anyone who has tried to enforce a dress code.

[Kyle Borger]

My behavior would not change, but...

At one time iin my life as a Nazarene following God meant following the manual. I once spoke to my youth group as a teen on the evils of the cinema. I grew very lonely on campus at a Nazarene university when I refused to watch movies either in the theater or via VCR. I also refused to go dancing.

Serving the church in various positions it was difficult to accept that some people were members or leaders since they were not obeying the manual. How could someone be a board member and have wine in their house? Didn't they read the manual?

Then I started to grow uncomfortable with Pastors who didn't hold elections the right way or have a proper annual meeting. I couldn't believe it when I found out that most pastors ignore some portion of the manual. How could this be?

Then I began to learn that following God is about living in relationships. I still follow the manual because I believe that as a member I made that commitment. But I give others a little more room because their relationship with God is more important to me than if they are following the Nazarene manual. I agree with what is written, but I would rather their behavior match it as a natural course of loving Jesus and because they understand the reasoning behind it, not because the church says we have to do it.

We do need to explain about our history and our desire to be a refuge for those who suffer from compulsive behaviors and why as a result we often limit certain freedoms. The loving behavior and reason needs to be explained instead of having it come across as a set of rules.

Unless you grew up using the manual as a rule book like I did it is probably safe to assume that you attend the Nazarene church and have no idea there is even a manual with a code of conduct.

I kind of worry about it but I don't have time right now. I am too busy training disciples to make disciples of Christ.

[Bob Hunter]

In case you don't understand the wisdom here, just talk to anyone who has tried to enforce a dress code.

When I was a Resident counselor at MVNU, I made several attempts to enforce the dress code (no hats at the commons, etc). Big mistake! Never again, I made more enemies. They tossed that rule not long after I graduated. Thank God, another class of freshman will not subjected to such a ridiculous set of rules.

[Jim Chabot]

Then I would have to quit doing a lot of things. No more rock music, apple pie, cable TV, sports, etc.

Yes absolutely, this is who we have always been, this is the only aspect of Wesleyanism to which we have signed on to. Without personal holiness, surely we can still be Christian, yet we are no longer Nazarenes.

I am just saying the possibility always exist that we might cause another to sin. We simply can't live in a vacuum. I think we have to do what we can to be sure we are not intentionally standing in someone's way.

Yes, agreed.

[Bob Hunter]

Yes absolutely, this is who we have always been, this is the only aspect of Wesleyanism to which we have signed on to. Without personal holiness, surely we can still be Christian, yet we are no longer Nazarenes.
Yes, agreed.

I think this can lead down a dangerous path of legalism, separatism, seclusion, disunion with the world and eventual irrelevance. But wait... you are right, we already have a history of that! Which is why many of us are suggesting a change in the CCC. What I "don't" do is not an effective strategy for evangelism! Holiness begins with the heart and manifest itself outwardly in real life. It does not begin with rules and a set list of "don'ts"

[G R 'Scott' Cundiff]

The point is that no matter what, we'll never please everybody--not even everybody within the Church of the Nazarene.

Attachment 3840

Not only that, but when you let everyone else tell you what to do, the donkeys win.

[Dale Cozby]

Jesus turned water into ______________?

What was in the cup at the Last Supper?

Welch's grape juice has only been around since 1869. It was unfermented for the sole purpose of a Church communion service. What was used in the pre-Welch era?

Not endorsing alcohol consumption, I'm just making an observation.

sigh...this is such a tired debate point.
There is a long way between BYOB sunday school class parties and Wine used for communion.There is a long way between reading a newspaper on Sunday and watching porn on the internet.
There is a long way between watching the "audio-visual" of Bambi and watching "Natural Born Killers"(which I have not seen btw)
Yes, using judgement is a good thing to start with, but the CCC helps get us started in what is good judgment.

It isn't a list of 'don'ts" so much as these things we have found to be derimental to knowing "Christ and the power of his resurrection and the fellowship of sharing in his sufferings"
So the debate rages over how absolutely little we should change from being worldly so we can claim to be like Christ or at least giving adequate lip service to it. How much sinful worldly and fleshly ways can we hold on to without absolutely everyone calling us a hypocrite or a liar.

[G R 'Scott' Cundiff]

My thinking is that when the Church binds something on earth it is bound it heaven. When it loosens something on earth is it loosed in heaven. This "Jesus drank wine" business ignores the fact that Jesus, himself, gave the Church authority to react to cultural, economic, social, etc. issues it might encounter.

[Billy Cox]

we can get into the issues of not doing anything that might cause other people to stumble, but then we could start bringing into the equation that eating a candy bar might cause a diabetic to stumble, so we should abstain from all candy out of a sense of love and concern for others--just to name one thing)..

Even that standard has a range to it. My having a drink in the presence of an alcoholic who has been three years sober will not be as risky as doing so in the presence of someone three weeks sober. There is a point in our ethical development where seeing someone do what we are convicted to abstain from will not cause the person to stumble. Maybe this is why Paul refers to 'weaker brother' rather than issuing a blanket rule.

[Gary Creely]

There is a long way between BYOB sunday school class parties and Wine used for communion..

Actually, no there is not.

However, if the manual loosened up on adult beverages I would think it to be important and wise for there to continue to be a prohibition of alcohol at any church activity, or church connected activity. Not because it is biblical, but because it is common sense.

[Susan Unger]

And this is a fair observation. Jesus turned water into wine, it was wine that was in the cup, and yes I believe that it was fermented.

I think that we realize that drinking isn't sinful unless it leads to drunkenness. It is a stumbling block to others, we should be a safe haven for those who are alcoholics, we should care enough to abstain. I believe that this is foundational to holiness people, this is part of our dna.

This is why I like our anti-alcohol stance. Having talked with some former alcoholics in my church, I am so glad that we can provide a safe haven.

[Paul DeBaufer]

sigh...this is such a tired debate point.
There is a long way between BYOB sunday school class parties and Wine used for communion.There is a long way between reading a newspaper on Sunday and watching porn on the internet.
There is a long way between watching the "audio-visual" of Bambi and watching "Natural Born Killers"(which I have not seen btw)
Yes, using judgement is a good thing to start with, but the CCC helps get us started in what is good judgment.

It isn't a list of 'don'ts" so much as these things we have found to be derimental to knowing "Christ and the power of his resurrection and the fellowship of sharing in his sufferings"
So the debate rages over how absolutely little we should change from being worldly so we can claim to be like Christ or at least giving adequate lip service to it. How much sinful worldly and fleshly ways can we hold on to without absolutely everyone calling us a hypocrite or a liar.

Except as written it is a list of don'ts. I used to rationalize, too, that it was as you say and as Jim desisres, definitions of who we are as Nazarenes and warnings of evils in the world, however, it was just that, rationalization. As written they are rules, things we are not allowed to do. If the CCC was simply definitions and warnings I don't think we'd be having this discussion.

[Paul DeBaufer]

Even that standard has a range to it. My having a drink in the presence of an alcoholic who has been three years sober will not be as risky as doing so in the presence of someone three weeks sober. There is a point in our ethical development where seeing someone do what we are convicted to abstain from will not cause the person to stumble. Maybe this is why Paul refers to 'weaker brother' rather than issuing a blanket rule.

I think it depends upon your position. If you are leading or working in a recovery ministry and say your issue is codependency and not alcohol you may well be able to have a drink with no adverse affects. However, if someone who participates in your recovery ministry who does have an alcohol issue sees you, you have just given them "permission". But if you are just someone else who is not involved in the ministry and that same person with the alcohol problem sees you drinking the impact will not be the same. I am using recovery ministry as illustration, and in the years I spent with Celebrate Recovery this came up, but the point isn't limited to recovery ministry.

[Craig Laughlin]

I think one of the biggest problems with prohibitions on things that are moral when under control (Drinking, dancing, going to movies etc), is that it keeps us from having having meaningful discussions about 1) Moderation and 2) how to protect the weaker family members if you do participate in these.

Pretty hard to say you can't do this but (wink, wink,) if you do...

It has been mentioned that some think only a tiny portion of the population can drink responsibly and in moderation. That has not been my experience I know lots and lots of folks that have it under control.

For the record, I don't drink, I have never drank, never even tried the stuff. (Strongest drink I ever had was Nyquil) If they were to lift the rule I still would not drink. My reasons have nothing to do with our manual statement.

[Ryan Scott]

Why do these discussion always end up with what the bible says about alcohol. The stance on alcohol in the Church of the Nazarene has nothing to do with what the bible says about alcohol; those discussions are irrelevant.

[Doug Ward]

This is the reason to not have rules but warnings about things we see as dangerous. I find a conversation about the dangers associated with xyz is vastly more effective at changing behavior than simply restricting the behavior.

This is the approach that I endorse as well. I think we need to stay away from the idea that we are giving rules, or these are qualifiers for membership, participation, etc. However, I would like there to be language that encourages our people to live wisely, and be aware of the devastating effects of alcohol, tobacco, drugs, obesity, etc.

As someone who is yearly involved with college aged-kids at one of our colleges - we have lost the battle on alcohol. For years we have told them it is damaging (when medicine disagrees), we have told them it is a sin (when Scripture disagrees), and their response has been to tune us out. The approach I have taken in class, when asked about this issue, is to explain the cultural use of alcohol then. And to contrast this with our cultural experience of alcohol.

Yes, wine was commonly used in the first century, and Jesus would have participated in that use. Commonly, wine was added to water in that day (about 2 parts water and 1 part wine). This was done to make the wine stretch further, but mainly for the alcohol to make the water safer for drinking. The author of 1 Timothy mentions this in chapter 5. So yes, alcohol was used, and it was needed in the first century.

Today,alcohol tends to not be used in that fashion. We have a culture where tens of thousands die each year from the effects of alcohol. There are also thousands killed each year from driving deaths. There are also countless homes split apart, marriages strained, fights started, unwanted sexual encounters initiated, etc. from the use of alcohol. To the extent that we involve ourselves with alcohol, we are opening our lives up to potential devastation.

Here is the linchpin of my argument. The issue is not really about your individual stand on alcohol. The issue is that in our culture that absolutely abuses this substance, is there not room for a welcome voice that states, "we, the Church, caution against the use of alcohol." It can have devastating effects, and we have found it is not necessary for life, you do not need it to haver a good time, and your life will probably be better without its use. And I did not even get into the economic argument, which also seems strong. We, as holiness people, do we not have better things to do with money than the expense, often high expense of alcohol.

[Bob Hunter]

It has been mentioned that some think only a tiny portion of the population can drink responsibly and in moderation. That has not been my experience I know lots and lots of folks that have it under control.

That has been my experience. Had board members that responsibly consumed alcohol when I pastored-I never said a thing (or I may not have had a board). I don't know where this 1% came from, but I think it is totally wrong. I have heard, can't find the stats, that adolescents are at higher risk for alcohol abuse when they come from a home where alcohol is abused and or they come from a home where alcohol is completely forbidden as the mother of all evils. I came from a moderation home, and to be honest, it is a total non-issue for me and my siblings. Let me just say it that way without revealing my past, present or future intentions.

[Cam Pence]

I have been reading over the CCC and wonder if those who are opposed to it are opposed to to any particular parts more than others or if they are just opposed to general idea of it, or perhaps both. It seems the alcohol issue can quickly become the focus when speaking of CCC (with dancing in there somewhere), however alcohol aside, does anyone oppose any other specific parts and why? Is it specific "rules/guidelines/warnings/ect." that finds the most push back or the whole idea of a Code of Christian Conduct in general?