Over the last two weeks, I've been involved in Revive Indiana.  The pace has been a stretch, and I've made many new friends.  I've also had a number of conversations with people who have questions.  What is this about? Who is involved? Is it really a move of God or just some great marketing?

There is an important distinction to be made. Revive Indiana is a vessel, an organization with leaders who are a vehicle that God is using to change our community.  The excitement and energy that is currently focused around this organization does not negate the way God is already at work in many others places, both inside and outside the local churches in our community.  The level of involvement a pastor or congregation has with Revive Indiana is not a sign of how faithful and true they are. The outpouring and blessings of God are not constrained by human designs and plans. 

At the same time, something is clearly happening in a powerful way.  What is making this work?  I believe it is the coming together of the favor of God through the commitment to very specific acts of obedience.  Ultimately, this "works" because God is at work. It is as if God has simply said, "It's Time!" to our community.  The reports of healing, commitment to Christ, the openness to disruption and life change are not a result of human power.

For me personally, it feels like the story of the man who went to the hardware store to buy a chainsaw.  He asked the worker for a good saw, and selected one of the most powerful and largest models they had in the store.  He purchased it and went home, but was back the next day.  "This is a terrible saw, I've hardly made any progress and I've been working for hours on one small tree."  The worker took the saw from him, pulled the starter cord, and the saw roared to life. Startled, the customer jumped back and said, "What's that noise?"  After years of trying to use a chainsaw that wasn't running, it feels like the power has been turned on. 

There are four specific acts of obedience that I see as being critical to this continued favor. The first is the willingness to put the work of God's activity through the Holy Spirit, grounded in scripture, at the center of daily discernment.  The Revive Indiana leaders ask us to Love - Listen - Discern - Respond in every encounter.  I see them exemplify this in the pattern of their own lives. 

The second is the humility of gathering with others that help us cross denominational boundaries within the church. Churches are coming together, not as a rejection of the local churches, but for the purpose of unifying together in prayer and seeking the guidance of the Holy Spirit for this community.  

The third is the faithfulness of simply going out each day in teams to pray for others. About ten years ago I gathered with several groups of church leaders that would read and reflect on Luke 10, the passage where Jesus sent out the 72 to share the good news with others. We did this every time we met for several years, and not once did I make it a point to actually go and do what the passage invited me to do. We are now doing this.  On Saturday, 400 gathered to form 100 teams and pray for others. This was not about promoting a local church or Revive Indiana, it was about encounters with Jesus.

The fourth act of obedience is to eat together. In Acts, the table of fellowship is not just about communion, but also about the nature what it means to be connected with each other around an open table. Breakfast, lunch and dinner for six days of the week form the core of these places of connection as the gathered church.  Revive Indiana and the local churches have partnered together to make this a reality for 52 days. This comes at tremendous cost and sacrifice with no dramatic appeal for donations to cover costs. It is simply the church being the church together.
-John M Troyer

If you haven't yet been present for any Revive Indiana events, I invite you to come and check them out.  
Monday - Thursday
7:00am – Prayer time at Maple City Chapel (2015 Lincolnway E, Goshen, IN 46526)
8:00am – Breakfast at Maple City Chapel
9:00am – Organize into teams and Go Out to pray for churches

12:00pm – Noon time Prayer
Monday – First Baptist Church Elkhart 53953 County Road 17, Bristol, IN 46507
Tuesday – Nappanee Missionary Church 70417 State Road 19 North, Nappanee, IN 46550
Wednesday – Brenneman Missionary Church 61115 Indiana 15, Goshen, IN 46528
Thursday – Faith Mission 801 Benham Ave., Elkhart, IN
1:00pm – Lunch
2:00pm – Organize into teams and Go Out to pray for people

Monday - Thursday
5:30pm – Supper at Maple City Chapel (2015 Lincolnway E, Goshen, IN 46526)
7:00pm – Evening Prayer and Worship at Maple City Chapel

Friday
7:00am – Prayer time at Maple City Chapel (2015 Lincolnway E, Goshen, IN 46526)
8:00am – Breakfast at Maple City Chapel
9:00am – Organize into teams and Go Out to pray for churches
12:00pm – Noon time Prayer at River of Life Fellowship (11162 Indiana 120, Middlebury, IN 46540)
1:00pm – Lunch
2:00pm – Organize into teams and Go Out to pray for people
5:30pm – Supper at Clinton Frame Mennonite Church (63846 County Road 35, Goshen, IN 46528)
7:00pm – Training at Clinton Frame Mennonite (nursery through 3rd grade)

Saturday
7:00am – Prayer time at Clinton Frame Mennonite Church (63846 County Road 35, Goshen, IN 46528)
8:00am – Breakfast at Clinton Frame Mennonite Church
9:00am – Organize into teams and Go Out to pray for churches
12:00pm – Noon time Prayer at Calvary Assembly of God (1010 East Mishawaka Road, Elkhart, IN 46517)
1:00pm – Organize into teams and Go Out to pray for people
2:00pm – Lunch (out in the community with your team)
5:30pm – Supper at Clinton Frame Mennonite Church (63846 County Road 35, Goshen, IN 46528)
7:00pm – Evening Worship at Clinton Frame Mennonite (reviveKIDS and nursery)

Sunday
Worship at your local congregation and celebrate what God has done
Rest

I was moved last night as I saw hundreds of you gather on the stage at Revive Indiana.  I was moved, not because of your numbers, but because of the palpable movement of the Holy Spirit in your midst. All day, as I was praying alone and with others, I had a strong sense that Day 10 of our 52 day adventure was Freedom Day, especially for young people. And now, for those of you who weren't there, I want to invite you into something new. Some of you are in bondage. And Jesus has declared that in Him we can find life and freedom and joy.

You are the first generation to carry in your hands access to unlimited pornography which has crippled and trapped many of you. I invite you live into the favor of Jesus for your generation in this community and find freedom.

Some of you are struggling with addictions to drugs and alcohol, seeking out the next thrill without caring about the cost it may have in wrecking your life and your body. I invite you to live into the favor of Jesus for your generation in this community and find freedom. 

Some of you, like the Biblical Hebrews living in slavery in the land of Goshen, have carried heavy weights and expectations that are too high and too burdensome. You are asked to make more and more "bricks" by us adults in your studies and in extracurricular activities. We repent of the immensity of that burden, and shed tears for the emotional and physical damage it has done to you. We invite you to live into the favor of Jesus for your generation in this community and find freedom. 

Some of you are living a religious life that is without life. You have dutifully tried to be good and to do the right things but are mystified by what it means to truly live in the power of the Holy Spirit speaking into your life. We invite you to live into the favor of Jesus for your generation in this community and find freedom.

Some of you embraced a way of life that is that is presented as the path of peace and justice but is emptied of the living and real presence of God.  We repent that we as a church have remained quiet and avoided these justice concerns and have failed to demonstrate in our own lives the living and real presence of the Holy Spirit. We invite you to live into the favor of Jesus for your generation in this community and find freedom.

Some of you have lived in a roller coaster of emotions with intense worship but have not known the fruits of a transformed life. We repent that we as a church have not helped empower you to live into the favor of Jesus for your generation in this community and find freedom. 

This movement of God is much larger than one church or even an organization like Revive Indiana. It is a favor of God that only He has brought to this time and place.  Freedom is only found for the captives when we truly hear the direct voice of God through the Holy Spirit and then respond in obedience to the promptings He brings. As a host pastor, I invite you to take the opportunity to participate and be trained for that kind of life by joining Revive Indiana on Friday night at Clinton Frame Mennonite Church.  It is a night to strengthen all the churches in the community. This is a special night with not just worship, but clear Biblical teaching on how to press forward in the life of faith and freedom that only God can give. We will eat supper together at 5:30 and then begin at 7.  Bring a friend and come see what God will do.
-John M Troyer

This past few days I have seen God work in ways that I have longed to see for many, many years. On Friday, one of the young men in our youth group had his faith renewed and received the full indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Yesterday he went with a team of people to pray for our community and received a clear call and path to find and pray for a young man walking along the road and helped lead this young man to say yes to Jesus. Some friends of mine whose son has struggled with allergies and eczema received miraculous healing through the prayer of faith.  Yesterday, I was able to be a part of a team that was uniquely equipped to care for a sweet Christian lady who is experiencing intense pain and loneliness. These are just some of the stories of some of the people I know. Hundreds more are daily experiencing these divine appointments and healings in their workplaces and through intentional prayer in the community. People are seeing visions of God's favor and blessing resting on this community.

God is at work. Revival is happening in Northern Indiana. In this revival, we are seeing "fruit in keeping with repentance." We are seeing not just the sorrow of letting go of things of the past, but also the joy of new life and witness. We are not just seeing people who embrace the boldness of sharing faith with words, but people who are also sharing life and sacrificing on behalf of others. We are seeing not just conversion stories, but intentional follow up and walking together as disciples of Christ. We are not just seeing people from one background, congregation, or age, but people from all ages, backgrounds and walks of life. 

This movement is not the movement of  people who do everything right, who carefully plan their way forward. It is a movement of courage and challenge and mistakes. It is a movement in which we brush up against the denominational preferences of others and they rub us the wrong way. It is a movement in which cultures clash and our language is clumsy. It is a movement which will frighten some, anger some, and create barricades. But in the midst of this movement is the power of God at work to transform and do something new. 

We will see a backlash, a renewed effort to assign labels meant to discredit what is happening. But at its heart there is a simple return to the power of Christ's living presence and the desire to fully yield one's life in His service. I am ready and willing to serve.

Some of the numbers: Since a week ago, several hundred are going out each day in teams and praying for the community. The number gathered for worship each evening has been growing and is currently around 2,000. The intention is to continue doing this for a total of 52 days. 
-John M Troyer

The last few days I have been reading The Secret of the Strength by Peter Hoover.  I've been moved by this compilation of quotes from original Anabaptist sources and the challenge to be fully yielded to God. I was introduced to this on Sunday in my congregation when an Amish couple came as guests of our church and shared their story of renewal.   Here is the quote that was shared on Sunday:

This couple came to our church because they helped start a gathering of churches seeking renewal in Northern Indiana.  If you get a chance, I invite you to follow the links to read the book for free, to watch message from the Amish couple, and to learn more about what God is doing in the Northern Indiana community.
-John M Troyer 

On January 5 the Executive Board of Mennonite Church USA released the results of a survey of credentialed leaders within the denomination. These survey results were released in December to credentialed leaders and these are Matt Hamsher's reflections on the results.  This is a longer post than usual, but provides a good entry point for some of the pertinent data. The survey results can be reviewed in their entirety at the following link: http://www.mennoniteusa.org/survey-results/ -Editor

For evangelical third-way Anabaptists (neither liberal nor conservative), the survey results are disturbing rather than encouraging. Here’s the bottom line that most people will be most curious about: 45.5% of all credentialed leaders in Mennonite Church USA who responded to the survey believe that “LGBTQ individuals” who are celibate or in monogamous relationships should be eligible for leadership credentials in the denomination (this includes 19.5% who think leadership roles should be open to LGBTQ individuals without any conditions, including the expectation of monogamy, but more on that later).[1] I am greatly concerned that this large of a percentage, even if still in the minority, will move many more moderate and conservative congregations to leave MCUSA rather than stay and work for reform and renewal.

I would be inclined to disagree with the congregations who will exit if it were not for the broken (or perhaps even non-existent) system of authority and accountability within the denomination. 40.7% want area conferences or congregations to be centers of authority (i.e., being free of relational accountability to members of the denomination beyond their own conference or congregation) and 23.4% responded that the current structure is satisfactory.[2] If congregations and conferences can make their own decisions regarding credentialing outside the counsel of the wider church and there are no serious consequences[3] for breaking their relational commitment to the wider church, then there is no possibility for accountability at the denominational level. One cannot work for reform through the structure of the denomination if there is no avenue available to do so.[4]

In addition to these two major outcomes, there are a number of other interesting observations that can be made in relation to the survey results.
 
1. Many advocates of same-sex marriage have maintained that no matter what stance one takes on whether the church should bless same sex marriages we share a common teaching against casual sex and reserving sex for committed monogamous relationships. However, when almost one in five credentialed leaders (19.5%) responded that “LGBTQ individuals should have opportunities to serve in leadership roles without conditions” like being celibate or in a committed monogamous relationship,[5] we can no long make this assumption of shared convictions about monogamy. There is more at stake here than how the church responds to those who experience same-sex attraction.

2. Ohio Conference is one of eight area conferences that had at least two-thirds of their leaders opposed to LGBTQ membership.[6] Yet Ohio Conference, unlike other conferences with similar convictions like Lancaster, New York, Franklin, and South Central has not been represented by our conference leaders in organizations like Anabaptist Renewal Circles which has sought to bring reform and renewal from within MCUSA. How are we being represented in wider national conversations with other conference ministers and at the Constituency Leaders Council? It is true that anyone can report, for example, the results of the vote at our special delegate this past August, but shouldn’t the majority of our credentialed leaders actually be represented by leaders who share their views rather than merely attempting to describe them accurately?

3. One of the failures of denominational leadership since the inception of MCUSA has been in trying to continually “widen the tent” and include as many people as possible in the denomination.[7] Perhaps we are too insecure and afraid of declining attendance to think of saying “no” to those who have defected to the liberal and fundamentalist camps. Yet, trying to appease the ends of the spectrum has led to a loss of a missional identity, a loss of a clearly articulated sense of who we are and how that is different from either political option (left or right, liberal or fundamentalist) in our current politically and culturally polarized context. While those in the fundamentalist camp have tended to find reasons to leave over the years, liberals have instead hidden their true commitments or not been held accountable for them and have worked to gain control of communication agencies and educational institutions in the church, leading MCUSA to lurch toward cultural accommodation on the left. We are now faced with a choice not between left and right but between left and center.

If denominational leadership wishes to find unity in the church, the survey results actually offer a pretty straightforward way to do so. Only “15.9 percent are willing to support LGBTQ inclusion even if doing so results in membership losses for the denomination.” On the other hand, 43% of those who support the current teaching position of the church represented in the 1995 Confession of Faith in a Mennonite Church are willing to do so even if it results in losing members. This leaves 41.4% who said they “desire to find a way to live in unity within the diversity that exists in the church.”[8] In other words, denominational leaders have a fairly clear choice to keep 57.3% of the church together (by changing the Confession of Faith) or to keep 84.4% of the church together by maintaining the current teaching position of the church. I guess we will see if we really believe in unity or only when calls for unity serve to protect the pursuit of individual and congregational autonomy.

4. Another common canard of advocates for LGBTQ inclusion is that the church needs to change its teaching position on human sexuality or risk losing future generations of youth and young adults. If the inevitability of a change in generational attitudes were so certain, one would not expect to find that “the least support for LGBTQ membership is among those between 36 and 45 years of age” (45.2%).[9] While I would concur that it is not surprising that support for membership for LGBTQ persons is highest among 18-35 year olds (65.8%), given the incredible power and pressure of secular media and secular LGBTQ rights efforts, the fact that the second highest percentage of support comes from those between 56-65 may hold a clue to another reason why this is so. Many of those between the ages of 36 and 45 were educated and mentored into pastoral leadership during a time when a majority of professors and pastors still held (and taught and modeled) the current teaching position of the church. Many 18-35 year olds, however, have been educated and look to persons in the 56-65 year old category as role models, who are currently teaching and hold positions of influence in the church. Rather than assuming the inevitability of younger persons becoming more and more progressive in their views, the survey results may instead point to the need for greater accountability for those entrusted with the spiritual formation and education of our youth and young adults.
 
5. I was disappointed to see that there were only two short paragraphs included in the Executive Summary describing “Perspectives of People of Color” and nothing in the survey results itself. Very little concrete information is given about the responses collected from the additional interviews conducted with representatives of six Racial/Ethnic constituency groups other than the statement, “in general, their responses regarding affiliation and the future of the denomination paralleled the responses of Group 1 in the earlier analysis of area conferences (those area conferences where less than one-third of leaders supported membership for LGBTQ members).”[10] Is there a danger that the voices of people of color are being ignored or minimized when they are not identified or fully reported?
 
6. Finally, I have a few concerns about the language used in the survey and the report of the survey results.

a. The belief and teaching that marriage is the only appropriate arena for sexual intimacy and that marriage is defined as being for one man and one woman for life is the current teaching position of the church as well as being the historic teaching position on sexuality. To only use the adjective “historic” implicitly implies that it is only a position taken in the past or elides the fact that it remains the teaching position of the church, at least until the delegate body would decide differently.

b. Questions about membership assume a common understanding about membership that may not in fact exist. One might, for example, be open to local congregations making pastoral decisions regarding membership that respect where an individual might be on their journey toward Jesus. So, an LGBTQ individual in a monogamous relationship might be accepted into membership, even as the church continues to witness and teach that same-sex sexual intimacy is contrary to the will of God. A more important question might not focus on same-sex attraction and identity at all, but rather what membership means.

c. The options for “a preferred future for the organization of Mennonite Church USA” seem limited to hierarchical or anarchical options. There was no option listed that supported recognizing that the delegate body is the highest authority in the denomination and could decide to exercise accountability through the discipline of area conferences. I suspect that this is why 25.2% marked “Not sure” in their response.[11] It seems to me that this is a fairly high percentage to not have an opinion or be unsure of the kind of organizational polity MCUSA should adopt. I also wonder how many of the 23.4% who indicated that the current organizational structure is satisfactory did so because they like the dysfunctional system we currently have or if they did not like the other options that were presented. If there is one question in which we could have a “do-over” it would be this one, with three options: authoritarian leadership with authority heavily invested in an Executive Director and staff and in the Executive Board, a lasses-faire model of congregational autonomy, or a model that calls for giving and receiving counsel and accountability equally at every level—between individuals in a congregation, congregations in a conference, and conferences in a denomination.
 
In conclusion, I share the disappointment and sadness of many other evangelical Anabaptists in MCUSA in seeing the concrete results of the survey. The survey results are not good news for the direction of the denomination—“73.9% of active and active-without-charge leaders in the Church Member Profile 2006 stated that homosexual relations were always wrong,”[12] meaning that we have gone from about a 75% consensus to an almost 50-50 split in less than a decade. What will the next ten years hold?

If there is any hope to be found in the survey results, it is that they may serve as a wake-up call to those who value unity but are reticent to exercise accountability. What is at stake is not who can be a part of the church, but whether there is any accountability for leaders and teachers for our common commitments that we hold together. To continue on the path of pluralism is to accept a definition of unity through human effort rather than Christian unity which can only be found in the Holy Spirit’s leading us to common convictions. To continue to refuse to exercise accountability will only continue to erode our missional identity and water down witness we can offer to one another and the watching world.
-Matt Hamsher

[1] “Executive Summary,” p. 1. 19.5% without conditions + 26% in monogamous relationships or celibate = 45.5%.
[2] “Appendix I: Tables 10-32,” p. 4. Totals in Table 13.
[3] See “Report from the Executive Board of Mennonite Church USA” (June 30, 2014) in which the only decisive action taken by the board was to refuse to recognize Theda Good’s credential and not including it in the denominational database (Action 3, p. 2). The other actions merely “call,” “ask,” and “request” actions on the part of Mountain States and other conferences even when the Executive Board clearly recognized that Mountain States “failed to honor the relational covenant that they made with the other area conferences when they joined Mennonite Church USA in 2005” (Action 2, p. 2). The most appropriate use of authority for the Executive Board would have been to temporarily suspend the membership of MSMC until they returned to the covenant they made or until the delegate body had opportunity to take action.
[4] Of course, there is still the option of being a prophetic voice calling for repentance and renewal in the church and it is a noble calling. However, it is not clear that the most effective way to do this is to remain part of a pluralistic denomination that lacks avenues for accountability.
[5] “Appendix I,” Table 11, p. 2.
[6] “Executive Summary,” p. 2.
[7] The Purposeful Plan was breath of fresh air and a notable departure from the usual approach and sought to lead from the middle rather than being held hostage to the liberal and fundamentalist wings of the denomination. Unfortunately, one of its fatal flaws was the emphasis on “resourcing over regulation,” (lines 785-805) implicitly adopting a negative connotation to accountability that was cited in favor of not exercising authority in the “Report from the Executive Board of Mennonite Church USA” (June 30, 2014), p. 2.
[8] “Executive Summary,” p. 2.
[9] “Executive Summary,” p. 2.
[10] “Executive Summary,” p. 4.
[11] “Appendix I,” Table 13, p. 3.
[12] “Final Report,” lines 270-271, p. 7.