by Steve | Mar 15, 2022 | Uncategorized
By Bishop Robert Aboagye-Mensah
If the Methodist movement has any hope for continuing its vibrant global mission into the future, it must build its mission on the same foundations on which John Wesley built.
Bishop Robert Aboagye-Mensah
On February 3, 1738, when John Wesley returned to London after he had served as a missionary in America, he had this to say, “It is now two years and almost four months since I left my native country, in order to teach the Georgian Indians the nature of Christianity. But what have I learned myself in the mean time? Why, … that I who went to America to convert others, was never myself converted to God.”
Four days after this confession, under Providence, Wesley met Peter Bohler, a minister of the Moravian Church. Bohler took Wesley through the Bible and on several occasions explained to him that it is by grace that we are instantaneously saved, through faith in Christ alone. Finally, according to his Journal, on May 24, 1738 Wesley experienced this grace firsthand.
“I went very unwillingly to a society in Aldersgate Street, where one was reading Luther’s Preface to the Epistle to the Romans,” he wrote. “About a quarter before nine, while he was describing the change, which God works in the heart through faith in Christ, I felt my heart strangely warmed. I felt I did trust in Christ alone for salvation; and an assurance was given to me, that he had taken away my sins, even mine, and saved me from the law of sin and death.”
Wesley later placed his conversion to God – and indeed, his entire ministry – in the context of the Bible.
“I want to know one thing – the way to heaven; how to land safe on that happy shore. God himself has condescended to teach that way: For this very end he came from heaven. He has written it down in a book. O give me that book,” he famously wrote. “At any price, give me the book of God! I have it: Here is knowledge enough for me. Let me be homo unius libri [a man of one book]. Here then I am, far from the busy ways of men. I sit down alone: Only God is here. In his presence I open, I read his book; for this end, to find the way to heaven. I then search after and consider parallel passages of Scripture, ‘comparing spiritual things with spiritual.’ I meditate thereon with all the attention and earnestness of which my mind is capable…. And what I thus learn, that I teach.”
Wesley is here recapturing the mission of God as found in the whole Bible. That is, God wills to be known and worshipped by all persons and nations as the One and only Creator, Ruler, Judge, and the Savior of the world, and that in Jesus Christ this mission of God has been fully realized. After his conversion, Wesley referred to the Bible as “the book of God,” and himself as “a man of one book.” For him, in all matters the Church is to be judged by Scripture – and not Scripture by the Church. As he put it, “as long we have the Scripture, the Church is to be referred to the Scripture, and not the Scripture to the Church; and that, as the Scripture is the best expounder of itself, so the best way to know whether anything be of divine authority, is to apply ourselves to the Scripture.”
Wesley also understood that the Holy Spirit who inspired the original authors of the Bible continues to inspire current individuals and groups as they study and meditate on the Word. Additionally, he admonished Christians to “consult those who are experienced in the things of God, and then the writings whereby, being dead, they yet speak.” Here, Wesley is referring to some of the early African Church Fathers like Origen, Athanasius, Clement of Alexandria, and Augustine. In his book The Rebirth of African Orthodoxy: Return to Foundations, Thomas C. Oden states that these Church Fathers were considered among others as “the most authentic commentators on Scripture, as being both nearest the fountain, and eminently endued with the Spirit by whom all Scriptures was given.”
Dr. Oden points out that in addition to accepting the biblical interpretation of these early African Fathers, Wesley was also greatly influenced by their commitments to holy living, by how they immersed themselves in prayer, their dedicated reading and studying of the Bible and by opening themselves to the leading and guidance of the Holy Spirit, particularly in worship. These African saints became models for Wesley’s own life and ministry in eighteenth century England. Today there are African Methodist scholars who also consider the early African Church Fathers as models of reliable interpreters of the Bible and have returned to them, studying their Bible commentaries and Christian spirituality. (African scholars are sincerely grateful to Dr. Oden and the Center for Early African Christianity for making available Bible commentaries of the early Church Fathers, particularly that of the African Church Fathers.)
Wesley’s view of the Bible is extremely important for the future of global Methodism. May we reflect on the opening words of Wesley on “Thoughts Upon Methodism.”
“I am not afraid that the people called Methodists should ever cease to exist either in Europe or America. But I am afraid, lest they should exist as a dead sect, having the form of religion without the power. And this undoubtedly will be the case, unless they hold fast both the doctrine, spirit, and discipline with which they first set out.”
To maintain our identity and relevance in the world as the people globally called Methodists, we will have to be people of the “Book of God” – the Bible. As John Wesley and the early Methodists were, may we be a people of one book.
Robert K. Aboagye-Mensah is the past Presiding Bishop of the Methodist Church Ghana (2003-2009). During that period he also served as a member of the Central Committee of the World Council of Churches (WCC), and also as the Vice-President of All Africa Conference of Churches (AACC) for West Africa sub-region. The Most Rev. Dr. Aboagye-Mensah was a member of the Board of Directors of The Mission Society from 2009 to 2015. This is the third of a series of articles provided by TMS Global to platform some important voices in global Methodism. Image: Celebration in Lawra, Ghana for the dedication of a borehole at the Methodist Integrated Health Project. The Most Rev. Robert K. Aboagye-Mensah, in the middle in the cassock, presents cloth as a gift to short-term team members who helped build a parsonage in another town – and to Mary Kay Jackson. A TMS Global missionary and engineer, Mary Kay had drilled the borehole as part of her work with relief agencies to bring potable water to rural villages in Ghana. Photo provided by Mary Kay Jackson.
by Steve | Mar 15, 2022 | Magazine, March/April 2022
By David F. Watson
Since the 1700s, it has been commonplace in Western Christianity to question, or even reject, the veracity of claims about miracles, or what theologians refer to as “special divine action.” Sometimes, God acts directly in ways that transcend the normal course of events in nature. When we recognize such divine action, we call it a miracle.
Enlightenment philosophers and the theologians they influenced have at times argued that, if there is a God, this God does not enter directly into the goings-on of creation, exercising agency to change what would otherwise be the natural course of events. In the wake of two World Wars, the Holocaust, the detonation of atomic bombs over Japan, and countless other atrocities throughout the twentieth-century, many theologians simply regarded miracles as a non-starter. No, they said, the unavoidable conclusion is that we can no longer believe in the God of the Bible who so readily enters into the goings-on of our lives.
The problem is, there are so many cases in which Christians actually see miracles happen. They witness them in their own lives and the lives of those they love. There are simply too many accounts of God’s action in the world for us to ignore them. Miracles happen. They are in some senses shrouded in mystery, but the evidence for them is overwhelming.
Nevertheless, there remains much skepticism of miracles throughout the academy and segments of the church. Moreover, in parts of the church where miracles are generally accepted, there can still be considerable misunderstanding and irresponsible teaching. Thus in 2011, Professor Craig S. Keener published a two-volume magisterial work, Miracles: the Credibility of the New Testament Accounts (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic). At almost 1,200 pages, this work is an indispensable scholarly investigation into claims of special divine action, not only in the New Testament, but today as well. This book may be a bit much for the non-specialist, however. Not everyone has the time or inclination to make his or her way through such a weighty scholarly tome, valuable as it may be. Keener is aware of this, and has therefore provided a much briefer and more accessible volume, Miracles Today: The Supernatural Work of God in the Modern World (Baker).
The book consists of seven parts which are divided into relatively short chapters. Part 1 is called “Perspectives on Miracles” and asks the question, “What is a miracle?” It then provides a few answers, dealing in the process with some skeptical responses to claims of the miraculous, and particularly that of Scottish philosopher David Hume. In Part 2, Keener discusses witnesses to miracles. Are there many of them? Do people other than Christains report them? Is healing a new phenomenon in the history of the church? He then offers a few testimonies of healing. With Part 3, “Videos and Doctor’s Reports,” the book becomes a bit more testimony-heavy. Keener deals with cases in which healings are captured on video and medically-attested healings of such conditions as severe brain injuries and cancer. Part 4 describes healings of conditions such as blindness, deafness, nerve damage, cerebral palsy, multiple sclerosis, muscular dystrophy, and leprosy.
Many Christians find faith healing to be plausible, and even pray for it. The next two sections, however, will likely be harder pills to swallow. Part 5 deals with the raising of the dead, and Part 6 with nature miracles. Keener provides documentary evidence that the prayers of the faithful can even raise the dead. In fact, he provides testimony of this phenomenon from within his own family. He then goes on to discuss what are often called “nature miracles,” such as the calming of storms or the multiplication of food through the prayers of the faithful.
Part 7, “Kingdom Mysteries,” takes up more philosophical and theological matters related to healing and deals with some common objections. After discussing some miracles that he himself has witnessed and experienced, Keener addresses some questions that many inquisitive readers will ask. Why don’t we see more miracles in the West? Correlatively, why do these reports seem so commonly to come from the “mission field”? How should we understand occasions when we pray for miracles and they don’t happen? Why do conditions that God heals sometimes return later?
Following this seven-part discussion are three appendices: (A) Did Prayer Make Things Worse? (B) Some of Hume’s Other Arguments, and (C) False Signs.
Even in this briefer volume, Keener’s descriptions and theological account of miracles are substantial and compelling. He marshals considerable evidence in support of his primary claim, which is that God acts in miraculous ways today, just as he did in the time of the Bible. He offers testimony after testimony of miracles of various kinds. These testimonies are drawn from historical and contemporary sources, including people he knows personally. He even offers his own testimony in a few places.
Testimonies can help to build faith, and I found my own faith strengthened as I read. The quality of the research in these testimonies is impressive. These are not the equivalent of Bigfoot sightings. They are the thoroughly researched accounts of a meticulous scholar.
Keener doesn’t dodge difficult questions, either. While most of the book consists of testimonies, particularly in the latter chapters Keener deals with some important objections and problems related to belief in miracles. One objection he addresses, which I often hear as well, is that accounts of miracles seem to come much more often from faraway places than from the United States. Does this not diminish their credibility?
Keener addresses such questions adroitly. First of all, he provides numerous testimonies throughout the book of miracles occurring in the West. Further, he argues, the U.S. contains only about 5 percent of the world’s population. It is only natural that more miracles occur outside of the U.S. than within it.
Additionally, “when miracles happen here, our antisupernatural mindset often renders them invisible to us because we grasp at other explanations,” he writes. “Since miracles are therefore less meaningful to us, they are less likely to happen.”
Keener also suggests that “God usually performs dramatic signs either when people desperately need them or when he is getting people’s attention for the good news of Christ’s love in a special way.” In Africa, for example, which is the world’s second most populous continent, there is only one doctor for every ten thousand people. There are also many people in Africa who have yet to hear the good news of Jesus Christ. God wishes for these people to have the opportunity to know and love him. In this context, miracles are more prevalent.
Dr. Randy Clark, founder of Global Awakening, has seen miracles firsthand all over the world. He once told me, “The way of healing is the way of the cross.” What he meant was that a healing ministry can be a painful one because people are not always healed. The compassion that motivates one to engage in a ministry of healing necessarily leads to heartache over those who are not healed.
Keener discusses cases where a person is healed for a time, but then the same condition returns and takes his or her life. He also discusses cases in which people are not healed. A particularly moving account involves the death of his friend Nabeel Qureshi. Nabeel had a prominent ministry, and thousands of people were praying for his healing of stage-four stomach cancer. Keener even prayed that he himself might die in Nabeel’s place. “I felt that I had already accomplished enough for one life, if need be, whereas Nabeel had many years of fruitful ministry ahead of him.” God did not heal Nabeel in this life, though. “Toward the end of his mortal life,” Keener writes, “Nabeel suffered terribly.”
Many Christians know the pain of praying fervently for someone who nevertheless dies. Many know the pain of being with the sick through their last days of life. These can be a gut-wrenching, traumatic experiences, and we may understandably wonder why God did not heal in these cases. It may make no sense to us. Keener remarks, “After Nabeel’s death, I felt that God was saying we would understand this matter someday. It is beyond me to understand now, but I trust that God does know and understands much more than I do.”
Miracles Today is a sensitive, well-researched, theologically sophisticated work. I have seen miracles in my life. In fact, I have prayed for people who subsequently received healing. Yet reading through page after page of these testimonies of God’s goodness was a great encouragement to me, particularly after these two very difficult years of dealing with a global pandemic. I also learned a great deal from reading this work. Keener is one of the finest scholars working today. He is both a faithful Christian and a first-rate intellect. I give this book my strongest recommendation. It is a treasure.
One final note: in many ways, the postmodern West is returning to the kind of pluralistic environment in which the first Christians found themselves. Their milieu was permeated by all manner of religions and philosophy. To those early Christians amid the religiously chaotic world of ancient Corinth, the Apostle Paul wrote, “My message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Spirit’s power” (1 Corinthians 2:4).
Paul knew that it would be the visible power of the Holy Spirit that would bring that generation to faith. In our day, so very chaotic in its own ways, it can be hard to get a hearing for the faith, regardless of how wise or persuasive one’s words may be. We are once again going to have to rely upon the power of the living God and believe he will reveal himself through miracles of various kinds for his name’s sake and for the salvation of the lost. In recovering this kind of faith, we will need guides along the way. Professor Keener is one we can trust.
David F. Watson is Academic Dean and Professor of New Testament at United Theological Seminary in Dayton, Ohio. He is the author of several books, including Scripture and the Life of God (Seedbed), and lead editor of Firebrand (firebrandmag.com).
by Steve | Mar 15, 2022 | March/April 2022
By Walter Fenton
While the vast majority of theologically conservative United Methodist local churches are waiting to part ways with their denomination once the General Conference adopts a plan of separation later this year, others are not.
In late January, Frazer Church, one of the largest congregations in the Alabama-West Florida Annual Conference, voted to disaffiliate with the United Methodist Church and join the Free Methodist Church. It is one of several dozen other local UM churches that have left the denomination over the past year.
In light of several local churches that have disaffiliated from the Missouri Annual Conference, Bishop Robert Farr, the conference’s episcopal leader, recently released a statement and frequently-asked questions document regarding the disaffiliation process. While the statement briefly notes the grief Farr and the annual conference feel over the departure of sister congregations, it is principally a word of advice to other local churches contemplating disaffiliation.
“[S]ome attorneys [representing local churches] have engaged in disappointing practices,” Farr wrote. “[T]hey have refused to share the calculation of disaffiliation payments until after a congregation votes for disaffiliation, taken actions in violation of the Missouri Nonprofit Corporations Law, and made statements they knew to be false. In many cases, small churches have paid tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees on top of the same payment a similar church that worked directly with the Conference paid.”
Legal fees can quickly add up as attorneys acquaint themselves with the UM Church’s Book of Discipline, and then begin interacting with conference officials. When both parties are committed to reaching a fair and amicable agreement, the process can be straightforward, though inevitably time consuming and costly for a local church. However, if the parties perceive one another as adversaries, and attorneys offer unsound advice, local churches can spend tens of thousands of dollars in legal expenses on top of exit fees owed to the annual conference.
“As an attorney myself, I’m thankful the majority of people in the profession practice according to the highest standards,” said the Rev. Keith Boyette, my colleague and the president of the Wesleyan Covenant Association. “However, like any profession, we have our share of bad apples. When it comes to church law, some attorneys do poor research and then pass along bad advice to their clients. And even worse, some are unscrupulous and wittingly maneuver their clients into paying much higher legal fees than necessary. I wholeheartedly concur with Bishop Farr’s advice that local church leaders should do their due diligence before hiring an attorney.”
The Wesleyan Covenant Association has encouraged theologically conservative local churches to wait for the adoption of the Protocol of Reconciliation and Grace through Separation and then, under its terms, join the Global Methodist Church. While acknowledging the Protocol includes compromises neither centrist-progressives nor conservatives like, the WCA continues to believe it resolves a decades-long dispute as amicably as possible. It allows theologically conservative local churches to join the new denomination with all their property and assets without costly disaffiliation fees. The adoption of the Protocol would also keep the general church and local congregations from engaging in the bitter civil litigation that has cost other mainline denominations tens of millions of dollars.
Unlike some UM Church episcopal leaders, Bishop Farr wrote in his statement that he and Missouri Annual Conference leaders are willing to amicably and fairly work with local churches that want to disaffiliate. He noted that congregations and clergy that have expressed an interest in exiting the denomination have not been “the target[s] of any type of retribution.”
“We do have our differences with some of the terms the Missouri Annual Conference seeks to impose on disaffiliating churches,” said Boyette. “We think certain terms are contrary to what the Discipline clearly states. We counsel churches who choose to disaffiliate not to agree to terms that differ from those adopted by the 2019 General Conference. Nevertheless, we welcome efforts to allow local churches to depart as amicably as possible. In that spirit, while the Protocol has yet to be adopted, we believe annual conference leaders and local churches should use its terms as a model for parting ways.”
Walter Fenton is a United Methodist clergyperson and the Vice President for Strategic Engagement for the Wesleyan Covenant Association. Reprinted from the WCA’s Outlook by permission
by Steve | Mar 15, 2022 | March/April 2022
By Carolyn Moore
So much of what gets published these days regarding the state of Christianity paints a desperate picture. We’re led to believe that in our lifetimes, the Christian movement could well wither on the vine. And in our corner of the world, maybe. There is no question that the U.S. is transitioning into a post-Christian era, if by “post-Christian” we’re talking about regular church attendance and an agreed-upon set of core beliefs.
But that’s just America. Globally, Christianity is more than holding its own.
Let’s consider both the facts and the long-term trajectory. When Jesus was born, maybe half a dozen witnesses had some sense of his divinity. He began his public ministry as an adult with twelve people. Over the course of the four gospel accounts, we read that thousands were exposed in the next three years to the preaching and miracles of this early team. Not all who heard believed, but they did hear – and many followed. The resurrected Jesus appeared to more than 500 people before his ascension.
In the book of Acts, chapter two, after the resurrection and ascension of Jesus, we read about the first mass conversion of people to the way of Jesus. Three thousand people were converted in one day. This event set a faster pace for this new movement. After that, we read accounts of explosive growth in the known world. By the year 150 A.D. – roughly 120 years after that event we call Pentecost – there were an estimated 40,000 Christians in the world. Count 50 more years to 200 A.D., and that number had exploded to something like 250,000 believers. By the year 250 A.D., it was well over a million.
Philip Jenkins and Rodney Stark are the historians who did this math (see Stark’s 1996 book, The Rise of Christianity). A few years ago, Jenkins notes that it is stunning to think that within another 50 years (by 300 A.D.), “Christianity would be the dominant religion in the whole Roman Empire.”
To think that Caesar Augustus – when he called for that census that moved Mary and Joseph into position to birth a Messiah in Bethlehem – assumed he was just counting heads in the Roman empire! His count was actually a foretaste of the census to come, when this movement begun in a manger would begin to spread first through the known world and then eventually across the globe. Since the census of Caesar Augustus (which undoubtedly counted some of the first souls who in years to come would hear about the Kingdom of God from Jesus himself), an estimated 13 to 14 billion followers of Jesus have walked the earth.
Today, it is estimated that one in three humans walking the face of the earth are part of that count. That isn’t just folks who have heard the name of Jesus, but folks who are following him. One in three people call themselves followers of Jesus!
Which leads me to conclude that while Caesar Augustus was counting heads in the Roman empire (and unwittingly moving God’s agents into place), God was moving heaven and earth – for you.
Let that fact sink in when you are tempted to believe that you don’t matter, that your life has no purpose or is too overwhelming, or that God doesn’t care. Don’t fall for that lie.
The same God who moved heaven and earth to create the story of His Messiah stands ready today to move mountains for you. And that same God is perfectly capable of seeing this global movement called Christianity all the way through, until one day every tongue confesses that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
Carolyn Moore is the founding and lead pastor of Mosaic Church in Evans, Georgia. She is the chair of the Wesleyan Covenant Association Council. Dr. Moore is the author of many books including Supernatural: Experiencing the Power of God’s Kingdom. She blogs at artofholiness.com. Reprinted from her blog by permission.
by Steve | Mar 15, 2022 | Front Page News
By Joseph F. DiPaolo
A famous phrase was born in 1887, when the British historian known as Lord Acton (1834-1902), wrote a series of letters to Anglican Bishop Mandell Creighton about the problem of writing the history of the medieval church and its abuses, such as the Inquisition:
I cannot accept your canon that we are to judge Pope and King unlike other men, with a favourable presumption that they did no wrong. If there is any presumption, it is the other way against holders of power, increasing as the power increases … Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely … There is no worse heresy than that the office sanctifies the holder of it.
I fear that we are seeing the dangers of unchecked power now beginning to play out among some bishops of The United Methodist Church.
In a previous article, I outlined what I believe to be insincere efforts to hold General Conference and the flawed process the Commission on the General Conference used to decide to postpone it. In this article, I want to widen our view to the potential institutional fallout of that decision.
With the recent decision that no General Conference will meet until 2024 – five years after the special session of 2019 and a full eight years after its last full session in 2016 – a power void has been created, into which many of our bishops are now stepping.
Our polity is clear: General Conference is the governing body of the UM Church, not the Council of Bishops. General Conference alone determines the content of the Book of Discipline and makes policy for the whole denomination. Bishops are supposed to implement those policies.
Now, however, with no General Conference, critical decisions cannot be made about all the challenges before the UM Church, including theological division, separation and restructuring plans, questions of discipline and accountability, approval of agency budgets and personnel changes, and more. So, by default, bishops are now beginning to step into roles they were never intended to have, effectively wresting control of the governance of The United Methodist Church away from the General Conference.
How will this play out? We already see it happening. Be wary and prepare to ask questions if some bishops:
- Increasingly use talking points about how our system of governance is not working, and that pressing matters require them to act in unprecedented ways.
- “Interpret” critical passages of the Discipline – like Paragraphs 2548.2 and 2553 – in ways that depend on their regional context, or disallow disaffiliation under these paragraphs entirely, to maximize their control and thwart the aspirations of traditionalist congregations.
- Increasingly ignore those provisions of the Discipline with which they disagree or that are inconvenient for the bishop’s agenda.
- Call for jurisdictional conferences to be held – despite the fact that the Discipline arguably does not allow for that without General Conference meeting first – so they can pack the Council of Bishops with more progressives and displace conservatives.
- Contend that the 2024 General Conference is actually the postponed 2020 General Conference. Whatever their stated reasons for this, the real reason may be to retain a higher proportion of progressive delegates from the US vis-a-vis international delegates. That is because delegate elections for 2020 were based on 2016 membership figures. Delegate elections for 2024 would be based on 2020 membership figures, which will surely result in a lower proportion of US delegates after four more years of US membership decline and African church growth. (Judicial Council will eventually decide this question.)
There is now little or no way to hold bishops accountable or prevent them from enacting whatever policies they personally deem best. As some have said, we have moved into a diocesan model for bishops, where each bishop is a law unto themselves. Some bishops will continue to ignore parts of the Disciplinethey don’t like, while insisting on the letter of the law for those of us who want an amicable separation. Some will increasingly use their power in tyrannical ways to hold on to as much money and property as they possibly can for the institutional preservation of their annual conferences.
Some bishops are counting on traditionalist United Methodists throwing up their hands and walking away. Many undoubtedly will, especially in larger and wealthier churches that can raise the high price of using the disaffiliation clause (which, by the way, expires at the end of 2023, now that there will be no General Conference in 2022 that could have extended it). Without the Protocol, many traditionalist churches and pastors will find it much more difficult to leave with their property.
In fairness, bishops should use the congregational transfer available in ¶ 2548.2 and implement the principles of the Protocol for congregations choosing to move into the Global Methodist Church. Bishops seeking to provide an amicable resolution to our theological divide have a ready-made avenue in the Discipline that does not expire and does not require onerous financial terms. Several bishops have publicly stated that they want to help churches arrive at the destination where they need to be, honoring their consciences and theological commitments. Bishops have the choice to take this path of peace, rather than escalating the conflict and trying to coerce churches into remaining United Methodist against their will by imposing punitive requirements.
Lord Action’s assertion that power corrupts remains as true today as ever, as does his observation that the mere holding of a sacred office – like that of bishop – does not sanctify its holders, or immunize them from acting in authoritarian ways.
Time will tell how some bishops’ power grab will play out among United Methodists.
|
|
Joseph F. DiPaolo is Lead Pastor at Lancaster First United Methodist Church in Lancaster, Pennsylvania. He is also a member of the Wesleyan Covenant Association’s Global Council and a former member of the Commission on the General Conference.
|
|
