Archive: Pentecost’s Promise

Archive: Pentecost’s Promise

Archive: Pentecost’s Promise

The Joyful Grace of the Holy Spirit

By Gary L. Moore

As we approach this Pentecost season it is good for us to think about the work of the Holy Spirit in our United Methodist Church. Beyond just thinking, we should be praying and expecting an empowering move by the Holy Spirit to revive our church.

Like so many others, I became even more mindful of the power and ministry of the Holy Spirit through the witness of charismatic United Methodists. Believe me, I had plenty of questions about their experience of “baptism in the Holy Spirit” and the “gifts” they talked about (especially tongues, healing, deliverance). However, their love and joy were infectious. And even though I was inhibited and uncomfortable with their style of worship, I couldn’t escape the fact that it was alive and energetic; and that their prayers were filled with a sense of expectancy.

Testimonies like this could be multiplied 350 million times during the twentieth century. According to David Barrett’s statistics, the Pentecostal/charismatic movement is the fastest growing Christian movement in the world. It crosses denominational lines and is occurring on every continent.

Many leaders worldwide are praying for God to “pour out His Spirit upon the global Christian community during this decade, empowering her to do the work of world evangelization in the power of the Holy Spirit, together!” As this movement has matured during these last 20 years, there has been a growing sense of unity of purpose across the world…”a striving together for the faith of the gospel” (Phil.1:27).

Charismatics are often described as overzealous, tongues-speaking, fanatics who have invaded our churches. True, there are many who have not matured in their experience and have had a negative impact on this world-wide movement of God’s Spirit. On the other hand, there are those who have been equally immature in their desire to rid the church of that kind of folk, claiming that they are disruptive and divisive. There are, however, tens of thousands of maturing Spirit-filled United Methodists who feel called to stay, pray, and work for the renewal of our denomination.

No matter what our label, it is essential that we all come to understand and embrace the ministry of the Holy Spirit in and through the body of Christ. A charismatic, or Spirit-filled Christian, should be a “joyful, grace-gifted Christian.” Toe definition that I have come to use is derived from the Greek word charismata, and from my understanding of the Spirit filled life.

First, the Holy Spirit encourages us with joy. The Greek word char means joy. Scripture says that “in thy presence is fulness of joy” also “the joy of the Lord is my strength” (Neb.8:10). Jesus promised this joy to those that love and obey Him. If we live in the reality of a daily relationship with Jesus, in the power of the Holy Spirit, the joy of the Lord will be obvious. This joy comes not from our theology, but from learning to “be in His presence.”

Secondly, the Holy Spirit also enables us with Grace. The Greek word charis means grace. The unmerited favor of God that grants us the free gift of salvation is truly “amazing grace.” If that grace is overflowing in our lives, the result will be grace-fulness or graciousness toward others. If we are full of grace, we should also be filled to overflowing with the love of God. Scripture teaches that the evidence of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit is the love of God flowing in and through our hearts (Romans 5:5). Love orders our life according to the priorities of Jesus. Our love of God compels us to praise and worship Him, and to be obedient to His word. To love one another compels us to love His church and to be intentional about edifying the body of Christ.

Third, the Holy Spirit empowers us with spiritual gifts to build up the body of Christ. The Greek word charisma/charismata means gift or gifts (I Cor.12-14;Romans 12; Ephesians 4; I Peter 4:10-11). Christians should all be gift bearing, allowing any and all of the charisms of the Holy Spirit to flow through us for the benefit of others. We must recognize that it will take all of God’s gifts flowing through all of God’s children to touch all of God’s creation. It’s the only way that the task will ever be completed, “‘Not by might, nor by power, but by My Spirit,’ says the Lord of hosts” (Zech 4:6).

We must be aware of our calling. We are saved, sealed, sanctified servants with the same anointing as Jesus (see Luke 4:17-19; 1 John 2:20,27; 2 Cor.1:21-22). Jesus was a servant. He said that the essence of our lives would be that of a servant (see Matt. 20: 25-28 and Luke 22:25-27).

The year I began to seek a closer walk with God and to desire the power of the Holy Spirit I had an encounter with God that radically changed my life. When the Holy Spirit came upon me, I was filled with a peace that passed all understanding and a love that the world could not give. My heart was filled to overflowing.

After my encounter with the Holy Spirit, I began to anticipate the gifts of the Spirit in my own life. Prophetic words and words of wisdom gave direction and guidance. There was healing for damaged emotions, memories, relationships, and a physical problem. A new language of praise and power seemed to intensify my sense of God’s presence and power in my life. Gifts began to flow through me to bless others; exhortation and leadership enabled me to challenge, motivate and equip others for the work of the ministry.

As Spirit-filled Christians we should live in an experiential awareness of the presence and power of God. We have the privilege of walking daily with Jesus in the power of the Holy Spirit. We should learn to expect His presence in praise and worship. We should expect His power in the proclamation of Scripture. We should expect the preaching of the Word to be accompanied with a demonstration of the Spirit’s power (see I Cor. 2:4-5). We should live with an evangelistic expectancy that God will “add daily those who are being saved” (Acts 2:47), and that He will use us as His instruments.

Regardless of our respective labels as Christians, the apostle is clear when he addresses the church and says, “Be filled with the Spirit. Speaking to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody with your heart to the Lord, always giving thanks for all things, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ to God, even the Father” (Eph.5:18-20). The work is too great and the time is too short to attempt the work of the kingdom in the weakness of our own flesh… we need to be filled, and filled, and filled to overflowing, with the Spirit of the living God!

Isn’t it time for the people of God to stop analyzing and criticizing one another? Shouldn’t we stop trying to determine whether or not another person is filled with the Spirit according to our definitions? It’s time to stop arguing and start using whatever charisms (gifts) that we have been given by God to serve one another and to bring praise and honor and glory to Jesus. He alone is worthy!

Gary L. Moore is executive director of the United Methodist Renewal Services Fellowship (UMRSF), also known as “Manna Ministries.” UMRSF sponsors an annual National Conference on the Holy Spirit known as “Aldersgate” which will be held this year in Chattanooga, Tennessee. This article is adapted from Ed Robb’s Challenge newspaper.

Liberalism Through Time

Liberalism Through Time

Liberalism Through Time

By Steven O’Malley

1. Friedrich Schleiermacher (1768-1834) has been called the “father” of modern liberal Protestant theology. He combined the emphasis upon personal, subjective piety, learned from the Moravian tradition in which he was reared, with a receptiveness toward the development of biblical higher criticism. This left him disenchanted with the entrenched theological scholasticism of his day. As a popular preacher and later professor of theology in Berlin, Schleiermacher was attracted to the rising Romanticist movement, but he was disturbed when its spokesmen disdained religion because of their sophisticated humanist outlook. He criticized their position in his first book, On Religion: Speeches to Its Cultural Despisers (1799), and he proceeded to erect a new theological position in his major constructive work, The Christian Faith (1820-21).

In the latter work, Schleiermacher based religion not in a “knowing” or “doing” but in a “feeling of absolute dependence.” Within that framework, Christianity is regarded not as the only viable religion, with Jesus of Nazareth viewed as the only perfectly God-conscious Person who has lived. Further, he announced a goal-directed religious faith, whose object was the realization of the kingdom of God upon earth.

2. William Ellery Channing (1720-1842) was the foremost exponent of the Unitarian Theology while he served as pastor of the Federal Street Congregational Church in Boston. He was recognized as a “saintly” exponent of Arian views on Christ, which denied the eternal deity of the Son. He adopted the name “Unitarian” for the movement in 1815, and a decade later the American Unitarian Association was founded under his guidance.

3. David F. Strauss (1808-1874) was a student of F.C. Baur (1792-1860) In the renowned Tubingen (Germany) school, that had applied the tenets of Hegel’s dialectical idealism to New Testament studies. The result was Strauss’ publication of the sensational Leben Jesu (Life of Jesus”) In 1835, that began the 19th-century quest for recovering the “actual” Jesus of history, as opposed to the “Christ of faith,” as confessed in the Christian creeds.

4. Horace Bushnell (1802-1876), a Yale-educated Congregational pastor in Hartford, Connecticut, published the pioneer work advocating a “gradualist” approach to Christian education in his Christian Nurture (1847). This work argued against the revivalists’ insistence upon an emotional, instantaneous conversion experience as the basis for saving faith. He modified these views later in life.

5. Frederick D. Maurice (1805-1872) was an Anglican theologian who became deeply influenced by Darwin’s evolutionary hypothesis and who drew from it in developing his theory of Christian socialism as a “higher” form of evolving civilization that would supplant capitalist society. During his career as a priest and a professor at Cambridge, he increasingly advocated the primacy of God’s love as a force that will universally prevail over all forms of human rebellion against God.

6. Karl H. Graf (1815-1869) In his Gescluchtliche Bucher des Alten Testaments (1866) {“The Historical Books of the Old Testament”) argued that the lengthy “document that uses Elohim for God and includes the creation story in Genesis represents the basic “constituent” of the Pentateuch and was the latest section of it to be written. This became designated as the so-called “P” document. He thereby argued against the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch.

7. Albrecht Ritschl (1822-1889), a student of Schleiermacher, developed a theology based on the ethical implications of Jesus’ teaching concerning the kingdom of God. Here, he argued for the primacy of “moral values” as the proper focus for religion, and he advocated abandonment of any attempt to make scientific, factual judgments about Christian doctrines. His major work was The Christian Doctrine of Justification and Reconciliation (1870-1847).

8. The two chief proponents of the Social Gospel movement in the United States were Washington Gladden (1836-1918) and Walter Rauschenbusch (1861-1918). The former, who is called the father of this movement, served as a Congregational pastor for 36 years in Columbus, Ohio, where he advocated what he called “applied Christianity,” which was intended to counter the laissez faire attitude of Christians toward issues of social justice. The Baptist pastor-turned-professor Walter Rauschenbusch, galvanized these concerns into a systematic work entitled A Theology for the Social Gospel (1917). In it he advocated the transformation of the nation, and not just the church, into the moral kingdom of God upon earth.

9. Julius Wellhausen (1844-1918) was a prominent German Old Testament scholar who taught at Guttingen. He interpreted Israel’s cultural history in evolutionary terms, believing that the Hebrew religion developed from ‘‘tribalism” to “ethical monotheism.” He developed the documentary hypothesis of the Hexeteuch (the first six books of the Old Testament including the so-called J, E, D, and P documentary sources). By appealing to these sources, he argued against the traditional Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch (the first five Old Testament books).

10. Henry Emerson Fosdick (1878-1969) was a prominent American preacher and popular author who served New York Presbyterian and American Baptist churches and gained national fame as pastor of the nondenominational Riverside Church, also located In New York City. He further served as professor of preaching at Union Theological Seminary In New York. In these posts Fosdick sought to reconcile the disputes between science and religion in such a way that he became identified by American fundamentalist Christians as the symbol of religious modernism. At the same time, he criticized “modernism” for its intellectualism and moral ineptitude.

11., Albert Knudsen (1873-1953), a student of the personalist philosopher Bordon Parker Bowne, sought to draw the implications of this philosophy that stressed the centrality of human personality into a theological system. He taught at the Methodist-related Boston University. A critical issue in evaluating his major works, The Doctrine of God and The Doctrine of Redemption, is whether personal idealism or the Christian faith is the controlling element in his thought. L Harold DeWolf, author of The Case for Theology in Liberal Perspective (1959), was among Browne’s second generation of students, and he exercised considerable influence in the curriculum of Methodist theological studies in the postwar era.

12. The Federal Council of Churches, established in 1908, was the product of a conciliar or cooperative movement among several major American denominations that was especially concerned to orchestrate an approach to address the major moral and social issues of the newly-urbanized United States. It was preceded by the formation of several state councils and federations of churches, and its successor was the National Council of Churches of Christ in the USA, formed in 1950. On an international level, the ecumenical church conferences on Faith and Order and on Life and Work were merged to form the World Council of Churches at Amsterdam in 1948.

13. When Harvey Cox published his startling work, The Secular City (1965), “secular” had become a positive rather than a negative term, partly under the influence of Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s concept of “religionless Christianity.” Cox repudiates “secularism” but accepts “secularization,” which he defines as the irreversible historical process in which societies are “liberated” from supernatural views of reality in favor of so-called “open” views of the world.

14. Black theology has its roots in the non-violent ideology of Martin Luther King, Jr. (d. 1968), the champion of the American civil rights movement of the 1950’s. His “Letter from the Birmingham Jail” is considered a major manifesto in the advance of that movement Black authors in the 1970’s, such as James Cone, increasingly abandoned Kings’s call for non-violence in social protest, that King had learned from Gandhi, and favored a confronting approach that did not eschew the use of violence, where necessary. The canons of Marxist class conflict were more predominant in the “black power” ideology. These influences also become predominant in other dimensions of recent trends toward a “theology of liberation.” The latter Include Rosemary Reuther’s call for a radical feminine theology and Jose Bonlno’s call for a theology of social liberation within the Latin American cultural context.

A school of 20th-century American theologians, who have been associated with the University of Chicago, has attempted to integrate themes from the natural philosophy of Albert North Whitehead with the liberal Protestant tradition. They have sought to demonstrate the objective reality of God by an appeal to a scientific, naturalistic metaphysic rather than by appealing to traditional Christian theism. Major theologians In this school have included Charles Hartshorne, John Cobb, Jr., and Schubert Ogden. The latter two have conducted their work within the context of United Methodist theological seminaries.

Steven O ‘Malley is professor of church history and historical theology at Asbury Theological Seminary, Wilmore, Kentucky. This article appeard in the January/February 1991 issue of Good News.

 

Other notable theological dates

By Steve O’Malley

1799 – New scientific worldview, as advocated by Galileo, Newton, and Copemlcus. Secular and Humanist themes from the Enlightenment of the 18th century, as represented by Immanuel Kant. (1724-1804)

  • Friedrich Schleiermacher: “The Father of Protestant Liberal Theology.”

1835 – David F. Strauss begins quest for “Jesus of History”

1843- William Ellery Channing, patriarch of American Unitarianism begins writing

1848 – Horace Bushnell’s progressive view of Christian education in Christian Nurture (1847)

  • The critique from Karl Marx’s Communist Manifesto

1859 – Fredrick D. Maurice was the major exponent of Evolutionary Liberal Theology in Anglicanism

  • The challenge from Charles Darwin’s evolutionary hypothesis The Origin of Species

1866 – Karl H. Graf publishes his Geschichtliche Bucher des Alten Testaments (“The Historical Books of the Old Testament”)

  • Albrecht Ritschl publishes A Theology of Moral Values

1883 – Julius Wellhausen publishes his Prolegomena to the History of Israel

 1900 – Washington Gladden: “Father of the Social Gospel In America

 Frank Mason North led the adoption of the Methodist Social Creed

1907 –  Formation of the Methodist Federation for Social Service

  • The liberal Journal, The Christian Century, is founded
  • The formation of the Federal Council of Churches which later becomes the National Council of Churches.

1917 – Walter Rauschenbusch publishes A Theology for the Social Gospel

1920s – Major Impact of Preaching of Emerson Fosdick

1929 – Formation of the Universal Christian Council For Life and Work, forerunner of World Council of Churches

1930s – Major impact of Personalist Theology of A.C. Knudsen at Boston

1948 –  World Council of Churches

 

Liberalism Through Time

My Friend, the Liberal

My Friend, the Liberal

By Riley B. Case

My pastor friend Harry, down the road, is a liberal. Harry does not identify himself as a liberal. To Harry, labels like “liberal” or “evangelical” are divisive. “Why can’t we all just be Christians?” Harry asks, not aware, evidently, that such. talk, where distinctions are blurred in the name of inclusiveness, is the talk of liberals.

If he must live by a label, Harry prefers “middle-of-the-road.” Harry votes with the majority at his United Methodist annual conference and on the general boards of which he is a member. He does not understand why anyone would criticize the denominational Sunday school materials,  or want to attend something other than a United Methodist seminary, or be upset with the Board of Global Ministries. He is not sure, at the present time, that the church is ready for the ordination of practicing homosexuals, but, as he argues, he is “open,” and bis mind could be easily changed.

In short Harry is “middle-of-the-road” because his point of reference is the limited, liberal, mainline world He is quite oblivious to the greater part of Christianity – fundamentalist, evangelical, Pentecostal – which exists quite unrelated to Harry’s training and denominational experience.

Harry is suspicious of hard edges. Talk about Original Sin and Substitutionary Atonement and Hell sounds harsh to him. His sermons are essays about God-in-general, faith-in-general, and doing better. The exception is when Harry comes home from a preacher’s conference. Then he gets prophetic and talks on saving the whales or American foreign policy.

Consistent with his desire to be always relevant, Harry experiments with whatever is in style at the moment, whether it be spiritual formation, or liturgical dance, or defense of the environment, or intinction. He works hard to make sure his language is always “inclusive.”

On the Board of Ordained Ministry, Harry is more concerned about whether ordinands know how to think than in what they believe. Faithfulness to Harry means loyalty to the denomination rather than to the God of the historic creeds and the doctrinal standards. When he rails it is not against unbelief but against rigidity and intolerance, as in the view that the Bible is the written Word of God and that salvation is only in Jesus Christ. If his congregation is sometimes disappointed in him it is because of their undue conservativism and their lack of enlightenment.

Harry is a typical United Methodist pastor, trained in a United Methodist seminary, and buying the official United Methodist approach to Christianity. Harry is a liberal.

 

Riley Case is pastor of St. Luke’s United Methodist Church, Kokomo, lndiana and former district superintendent in the North lndiana Conference.

Liberalism Through Time

The Liberal Majority

The Liberal Majority

By Martin Marty

March/April 1991

8.7 percent of Americans prefer to be seen as “liberal Protestants,” against 15.8 percent “conservative Protestants.” Most liberals are partly conservative, and many conservatives are partly liberal. Both types attract allegiances from the 58.3 percent who prefer to “Catholics,” “Moderate Protestants,” “Black Protestants.” With lines blurred, it is useful to inquire not about shadings, but about the liberal pole.

Just as fundamentalists, evangelicals, Pentecostals, and conservatives differ wildly with each other over fundamentals, such as baptism, The Lord’s Supper, human will, and eschatology; so liberals differ wildly with each other over the content of the faith, specific dogmas.

How liberals color their belief is therefore the only useful topic. Though they are critical liberal heirs of the Enlightenment, they display more suspicion of reason, science, individualist freedom, and progress, than did their grandparents. But being Christians they continue to see God active in the realms of the first three of these elements. Because they are liberal Christians, they believe in a transcendent and immanent God. But they are more ready than were their grandparents to address transcendence.

They believe in the divine incarnation and whole-making activity of Christ, but are more ready to stress the “fully human” elements in orthodoxy than are some of their traditionalist counterparts, while often finding less sure rationales to support the witness to the “fully divine.” They believe in the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church (more than do many conservatives, such as premillennial fundamentalists who have trouble finding it at all), but are more likely than conservatives to see its borders open, not closed. They thus find it more porous to the possibility of integrity in other faiths than are those versions of Christianity which enjoy thick barriers against others and great distances between them.

In Paul Ricocur’s terms, they are aware of “criticism” or “interpretation,” but for liberal Christians, this awareness did not lead them to lose faith. Nor did it inspire them to join those hardliners who believe “in spite of interpretation!” Instead, they believe “through interpretation.” This mode leads them to such commitment to openness, relativity, ambiguity, and  paradox, that some of them match Robert Frost’s depiction: A liberal is someone who will not take his own side in an argument

At their best, those near the liberal pole combine commitment with openness and express a humility about their belief, which has as much biblical grounding as do the commitments of their more arrogating and self-assured “conservative” counterparts – many of whom are apostate liberals who keep fighting their own pasts and caricaturing the hard-held faith of those in whose company they formerly found themselves.

Martin Marty is a professor at the University of Chicago and senior editor of The Christian Century.

Liberalism Through Time

The Truth of Liberalism

The Truth of Liberalism

By Richard John Neuhaus

March/April 1991

The term “liberalism” cloaks a multitude of sins, and a few virtues. Liberalism, also in our churches, is usually defined politically. It is theological liberalism, however, that should be our chief concern. Liberal theology is commonly dated from Friedrich Schleirmacher (d. 1834). His work, in many ways impressive, was given a radical turn by Ludwig Fuerbach (d 1872) who argued that all religious statements are “projections” of human experience, longings, and fantasies. The essential conflict between orthodox Christianity and this brand of liberalism is over the question of truth.

Although they may never have heard of Feuerbach, many liberals in our churches are thoroughgoing Feuerbachiam.. That is, they operate with the subjectivist assumption that truth means what is true for you. They are utilitarians in their belief that truth is what works. The end toward which such truth is supposed to “work” is the maximizing of the expression of the autonomous self. Truth, in this view, is a human construct. Truth is, quite precisely, a fabrication in the sense that is manufactured by us.

The autonomous self accepting only the truth that is useful to the self cannot abide the idea of authoritative truth external to the self. Put differently, such liberalism cannot make the distinction between the authoritative and the authoritarian. Every appeal to authoritative truth – God’s self-revelation, Scripture, creed – is by definition authoritarian because it threatens to cramp and limit the expressive self. In the name of open-mindedness, all authoritative truth claims must be relativized or debunked in order to permit each person to hold and teach “his or her truth.” This approach is often, and falsely, described in terms of “pluralism” and “inclusiveness.”

False pluralism is pretending that our deepest differences make no difference. Genuine pluralism is the serious engagement of our different understandings of the truth. The “inclusiveness” of this liberal approach is radically exclusive, since it excludes the normative truth of orthodox Christianity. The basic premise of Christianity is that the community and the self are to be subordinated in obedience to truth that is not of our manufacture, notably to the Truth who is Jesus the Christ.

The liberalism in question is parasitic; it is the unbelief that lives off belief. When triumphant, such liberalism is self-liquidating, for it dissolves the faith on which it feeds. Liberalism in its several forms, however, is also sustained by-varieties of ·”conservatism” that are self-opinionated, bigoted, unloving, imperious, and anti-intellectual. Such conservatisms make liberalism look good and help keep it going. The root meaning of “liberal” is generosity. Generosity of spirit is a virtue to be cultivated by all Christians. Given the history and present use of the term, however, we will be misunderstood if we call that virtue liberalism. Better to call it “speaking the truth in love” (Eph. 4:15).

Richard John Neuhaus is editor-in-chief of First Things: A Monthly Journal of Religion and Public Life

Liberalism Through Time

A Liberal Manifesto

A Liberal Manifesto

By W. Paul Jones

Conservatives and liberals need each other in order for each group to be sure what they don’t believe.  Such labels point loosely toward two sides of the spectrum, each being an umbrella for a wide assortment of positions – thus capable of being characterized only by general points. Let me venture some principles around which the liberal perspective might find agreement.

  1. Theological Method. The Wesleyan “quadrilateral” (of Scripture, tradition, experience, and reason) tends to be used in balanced fashion, with Scripture regarded as primary only if it is seen as itself richly reflective of reason, experience, and tradition. “The Bible says” carries no automatic authority, for revelation, of necessity, is received by humans as active recipients within the historical context in which the interpreter stands.
  2. Ongoing Revelation. Jesus as the Christ is not the only revelation, but the norm for God’s ongoing disclosures. Miracles are not interruptions of natural law, but the religious name for events illuminated by their divine meaning.
  3. Christology. The liberal stress is on Jesus’ humanity – as model, example, symbol, forerunner, or representative. Divinity tends to be a name for the sacred in each of us, which in Jesus attained preeminent fulfillment. Jesus’ uniqueness a matter of degree, then, more than of kind.
  4. Salvation. Rather than speaking of being “saved from,” liberals speak of salvation as “rendering healthy and whole.” The stress is positive rather than negative, concerned for acceptance more than judgment, celebration more than confession, Easter more than Lent – with a spirituality of creation more than. of redemption. liberals are uneasy about talk of “election,” inclined instead to emphasize freedom and choice.
  5. God. Stress is placed on God’s incomprehensibility, so that our words and concepts point toward, rather than describe definitively, the nature of God. Thus liberals are more open to the use of nonsexist language.
  6. Church/World. The church is the manifest expression of what the world is called to become – “thy Kingdom come on earth …” The inclination is toward “universalism,” in the sense that the good news is intended for all. Social change is not restricted lo changing individuals, but includes systemic change as well, with particular emphasis on ministry to society’s “losers.”

While the danger of liberalism is its possible assimilation into modern scientific and humanistic thinking, some of the dangers it recognizes in conservativism are these: idolatry to past interpretations of Christianity; judgmental exclusivity: undue individualism; dualism of spirit and body; and blindness to an identification of Christianity with conservative American economic and political values.

W. Paul Jones is a professor at Saint Paul School of Theology, Kansas City, Missouri