Moving Nazarene HQ Was Wrong

These are pictures of two out of four buildings that belonged/belong to the Church of the Nazarene at 63rd and the Paseo. The Church decided to move to Lenexa and in 2008 made the move.

I still think it was wrong. Yes, its tougher to live on the east side. Yes, the neighborhood is kind of rough. But what kind of witness is it to leave an area that needs Jesus Christ so much?

Yes, I've heard all the arguments. I spend half a year discussing it in the context of Kansas City First Church of the Nazarene moving with Gordon Wetmore (who was the pastor of First Church at that time--the late 1970s) during various shleppings back and forth from KCI. But moving HQ is different than a church congregation.

An anony commenter on TKC--the topic was MNU hosting Kris Kobach and his work on immigration--but this commenter had his memory working:

Anonymous said...

When the Nazarene decided to move to Kansas from their location east of Troost, I always wondered if it was racially motivated.

I think I have my answer now.

7/3/10 11:21 AM

As I said, the witness is wounded. Now, I understand it could be a matter of stewardship. But the money savings would have to be pretty good for me to think that moving from an area that so needs to be revived (in sooo many ways--Cidital Plaza is not far from 6401 The Paseo) is a good witness and testimony to the Gospel of Christ. To many, like this TKC commenter, it smells like White Fear.

As it did to me. Sorry, guys.