Our HISTORY of REIMAGINING

by Jacob Clagg, Director of Communications

Our Bi-Centennial, the 200th anniversary of the Churches of God, General Conference as a denomination, will be in 2025. So, naturally, this is a time of reflection on our history. We're sifting through the archives, dusting off centuryold books, pamphlets, and letters. We're doing this not just to reminisce, although holding history in our hands is sometimes a gift in itself; instead, we're digging into our past to rekindle a revival and a reimagined spirit for the sake of our future. This venture has begged us to ask questions like, "Where have we reimagined in our own history? Where are the points of catalytic change? Where are the visions that spearheaded new movements? When were the revivals that asked much and produced more?

While we’ve been using the word “reimagine” for the past year as our most recent slogan, it’s not new. The CGGC has been reimagining itself many times over for the last 200 years, and the ethos behind “reimagine” has also been behind, to some degree or another, every revival, reconstruction, and reformation of the Christian church since the beginning. Monastic communities sprung up in the late 3rd century, and Ascetics had already withdrawn from a life of community well before that. In stark contrast to these escapist movements, the adoption of Christianity as the official religion of Rome under Constantine does represent the kind of sweeping reimagining of how Christianity might be practiced and understood. Likewise, the Protestant Reformation may be the single largest reimagining in the Church's history, radically changing the direction of many believers and reshaping the continent of Europe indefinitely.

In each of these examples, we see that reimagining comes with certain pain points. The ascetic and monastic movements certainly reimagined how Christianity should be practiced, and it did develop profound adherence in these communities, but it was also a rejection of the rest of society, which left many people unable to be ministered to. On the other hand, Christianity's ascent to an empire-wide religion decreased Christian persecution, and it was never more free to evangelize, but many Christians were also compelled to compromise their beliefs for the benefit of the empire, and the temptation to conquer in the name of God was realized. Even the Protestant Reformation, ostensibly meant to restore Christianity from corruption and give the faith back into the hands of common folk, ultimately splintered the faith into 20,000 different denominations. Even when reimagining has good intentions, it sometimes comes at a great cost.

I could go on, speaking at length about the long history of reimagining and renewal in our own denomination, and in fact, a prior draft of this article did exactly that. But as I dug through filing cabinets of old archived documents, I came upon a certain quote that smacked me directly in the face. The quote came from a booklet commemorating the 150th anniversary of the CGGC called Time for Review, written in 1975. Richard E. Wilkin, the first Administrator of the CGGC from 1970 - 1987 (the longest tenure of any administrator/executive director), said,

When the church’s past becomes more intriguing than the church’s present or future, the church is in trouble. A very real peril is ours if we attempt to live in the past. It is possible to spend so much time in reflection and memorializing the past that we neglect our ministry in the present. In our celebrations we must remember that God is not finished with anything He is doing in His church and in the World.

And so Wilkin cuts a fine line between appreciating our history and becoming stuck in it. Likewise, there is a temptation to see our history as something to live into, or to recapture. “Gone are the glory days,” we sometimes say, and in many ways, that might be true. But what do we lose sight of when our eyes are cast backward, and our hands grope for bygone accolades? In chasing the renewal of our denomination, what other work gets left undone? Wilkin responds to this question too.

"A church that is interested only in its selfreformation has overlooked the pulse and throb of the Word of God given on behalf of the world (society)."

And he goes on to say that, "The church often talks mostly of itself, its structure, its doctrine, its name, its unity, its forms of worship, its buildings, etc. What would happen if we began not at this point not with the church, but the world? If we said.. “Who are the hungry, the blind, the captive?” The holy spirit never closes our hearts or our minds, but He tears us open continually for the sake of others, for the sake of community."

What is so striking to me about Wilkin’s quotes is that the language used and the problems addressed, even 50 years later, have not changed. The serious challenges the church faces were present and discernible even then. The inability of the denomination to make solid headways into cities, where populations are rising the most, was recognized even then, and in fact was recognized back in 1925. The pessimist in me looks at that and concludes that we are stuck in a conceptual rut. If the challenges remain the same, and our solutions and visions remain the same, then aren’t we destined for the same results? Will we still be talking about the same unsolved problems in another 25 or 50 years?

The optimist in me says that this is just the way of the world. There are always challenges, and until Christ returns, we will not overcome all our obstacles. That people are still resistant to the gospel and that the church still finds itself on the backfoot is an affirmation that we do not live in dangerously unique times, nor are our challenges dangerously unique. The context is different, and the methods we employ will have to be different, but the task and the challenge has always been the same, to preach Christ and to minister to a people who very often want nothing to do with us. As our denomination has for the last 200 years, and so to Christendom for the last 2000, we are to love people and to show them that the love of Christ is our very aim.

So let me ask the question differently. Instead of just asking, “Where has the denomination reimagined in the past?” let’s ask, “How has the denomination reimagined for the sake of God’s people?” I think I’ve found four examples that run deep into our past and might motivate us to make equally colossal shifts in the future.

First, one of the denomination's defining positions, while not entirely unique, was firmly planted in 1845. John Winebrenner and the General Eldership of the denomination affirmed in a document called the Resolutions on Slavery that “the system of involuntary slavery, as it exists in the United States of North America, is a flagrant violation of the natural, unalienable and most precious rights of man, and utterly inconsistent with the spirit, laws and profession of the Christian religion.” The insistence upon abolitionism was incredibly controversial, especially because the resolution also suggested slave-owning members of the Churches of God be “excommunicated.” Here we find the denomination, even early on, at the bleeding edge of public theology, and what it means for a church to be fully committed to the transformation of not only people, but the culture those people live in. Here we find a church that is invested in redeeming the world around it. This type of reimagining pushed the church to ultimately take a particular side in what would become a massive civil war. Richard Kern writes in Time for Review that:

“The vast majority of ministers and laymen in the Church of God, prior to 1861, were opposed to both slavery and war… when a choice had to be made most minsters and laymen abandoned their pacifism and supported 'Mr. Lincoln’s War' and the Union.”

Second, during this same era, the denomination licensed Martha Jane Beecher for ministry in 1858. This would, like the ardent support of abolitionism before it, put the denomination at the door of certain controversies, but would also be one of the defining pillars of the denomination, its support for women to use their God-given gifts for the sake of the Kingdom. It’s important to note that this puts the CGGC’s historic support of women decades ahead of many mainline Protestant denominations. The denomination would put to the test the idea of a priesthood of all believers, mobilizing whoever was willing into ministry for the Kingdom. From then to now, as it becomes more difficult to find quality Christian leadership, the church ought to be utilizing every willing person that God has called into ministry.

Third, with this precedent, Clara Landes was able to launch the CGGC’s first international mission in Uluberia, India, in 1898. The legacy of Clara Landes has continued on as our fields overseas flourish. The CGGC’s representation from other fields is so influential that the denomination's name was changed from its original name, Church of God in North America, to reflect our broader global makeup. By 1904, the mission in Bogra, India (now Bangladesh) was established by Viola Hershey and A.C. Bowers, and this field now operates 20 schools, 2 medical clinics, and well over 100 churches. The CGGC hasn’t stopped there; since then, we’ve started missions in Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Dominican Republic, Haiti, Kenya, Nicaragua, and Venezuela because we believe God is trying to redeem the whole world, and we want to be a part of that.

Clara Landes

Viola Hershey

Fourth and last, the establishment of two educational institutions, Findlay College in 1886 (now University of Findlay) and a denominational seminary in Winebrenner Graduate School of Divinity (now Winebrenner Theological Seminary) in 1942, clearly affirms the denomination's values. The creation of legitimate and well-equipped schools was another step in reimagining how the Churches of God might have kingdom impact, both in the realm of ministry training at the Winebrenner Theological Seminary and in secular work at the University of Findlay. Education is one of the most powerful tools in reshaping the world around us. These institutions are cultivating people who are prepared to tackle the deep issues (theological or otherwise) of our time.

Each of these reimaginings reshaped the nature of the denomination. A CGGC without our abolitionist history, without women in ministry, without a heavy emphasis on global missions, and without our affiliation with UF and WTS is a CGGC that is unrecognizable. That’s the wonderful thing about reimagining; it makes it impossible to imagine what life was like before or without.

Where we go from here is hard to say. Maybe it means spreading the gospel through house churches that challenge the traditional model of church. Maybe it means more recovery ministries that focus on restoring dignity to people. Maybe it’s both of those and a hundred other things. But whatever we imagine or dream up, the mission statement couldn’t be any clearer. We need to reimagine our churches to maximize their impact. We need to mobilize all people in our churches, regions, and fields for daring action that starts new creative ventures in the same way that we started education centers in the past. We need to be the church that doesn’t just reject the culture, but the church that transforms it.