Looking for Accountability in North Katanga

by Steve | Jul 27, 2020 | In the News, Perspective E-Newsletter

By Tom Lambrecht –

Family of Kasongo Kabange Kaba

Last week’s Perspective reported some troubling actions taken by the Board of Ordained Ministry in the West Congo Annual Conference, Central Congo Episcopal Area. Today’s post reports on similar actions taken in the North Katanga Annual Conference.

There are 3 million United Methodists in Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) — the largest contingent of Methodism outside the United States. The North Katanga Annual Conference is the largest annual conference in United Methodism, with over 900,000 members. It is two and a half times the size of North Georgia, which is the largest membership conference in the U.S.

At last count, there were roughly 6.6 million United Methodists in North America, 5.9 million in Africa, and 200,000 in the Philippines and Europe.

As in West Congo, the North Katanga Board of Ordained Ministry has taken action to penalize pastors and lay leaders who are working to promote faithfulness to traditional doctrines and moral teachings. These penalizing actions were taken contrary to the processes required by our Book of Discipline and violated the rights of the persons penalized. Complaints have been filed against the church authorities for these improper actions, but so far, the complaints have been either ignored or no remedy has been provided.

The Rev. Ilunga Banza Ben

The Rev. Ilunga Banza Ben is a clergy member of the North Katanga Conference. He was a General Conference delegate in 2012, 2016, and 2019, and was also elected for 2020. (His suspension less than three months before the scheduled meeting of the General Conference removed him from the delegation.) He had been serving as the liaison officer in Kinshasa (capitol city of the DRC), but had not been paid for over a year. When he asked to be paid, the conference paid him for 15 months’ service, and then the bishop closed the liaison office in September 2019, leaving Banza Ben still appointed to Kinshasa but without salary.

The Board of Ordained Ministry accused Banza Ben of “slander” and “defamation” because he made critical statements on social media (WhatsApp). His criticisms apparently included alleging that some leaders in North Katanga support the practice of homosexuality, that some pastors and leaders who came from other denominations into the UM Church were not adhering to United Methodist methods of decision-making, and that the election of bishops in 2017 in Congo was corrupt because some delegates allegedly received payments for their votes. Banza Ben also criticized the irregular convening of the special Central Conference meeting in December 2018, which retroactively granted life terms to the Bishops elected in March 2017.

In February, based on these accusations, the Board suspended Banza Ben “from all ecclesiastical functions and activities, of representativeness in delegations, until he could come and explain himself to the Board of Ordained Ministry of the Annual Conference at the July 2020 session.” Due to the pandemic, that session has been postponed, and Banza Ben remains on suspension without pay.

Banza Ben was not informed of any complaints against him, he was not informed about the meeting of the Board of Ordained Ministry at which he was suspended, and therefore, he was not present to answer these accusations. The Board of Ordained Ministry has no authority to suspend a clergyperson. Only the bishop can suspend a clergyperson with pay while a complaint is being processed. The suspension can only last 90 days, with the possibility of a 30-day extension (¶ 362.1d). Such suspension is not a punishment, but a way to protect both the pastor and the church.

In this case, the Board suspended Banza Ben without pay as a punishment for his WhatsApp posts without a complaint or supervisory process and without a trial. Most importantly, Banza Ben was never notified about the accusations against him, nor did he have the opportunity to answer those accusations.

In fact, Banza Ben found out about his suspension (and the accusations) by reading the unsigned minutes of the Board meeting posted by a person who is not United Methodist and not a member of the Board at an internet café.

Not only is Banza Ben without salary, but he has been excluded from receiving any relief money from UMCOR through the annual conference for the Covid-19 pandemic. He supports a family of seven and has no other steady source of income.

The Rev. Bishimba Kasongo

The Rev. Louis Bishimba Kasongo is an evangelist and pastor in the North Katanga Annual Conference. He was a delegate to General Conference in 2012, 2016, and 2019, but was not elected to serve for 2020.

Bishimba was accused of many of the same “offenses” as Banza Ben. He had leveled criticisms on social media (WhatsApp) against the bishop and other leaders of the North Katanga Conference. He alleged that there is confusion in the conference, with disagreement between the leaders and the rank-and-file pastors and members, that there are deficiencies in administration, that some leaders would tolerate the sin of homosexuality, and that some leaders were leading out of a selfish interest based on money. He further criticized the Board of Ordained Ministry for punitively suspending pastors when they have no right to do so.

In response, the Board of Ordained Ministry stated its philosophy: “It is not for nothing that the Board of Ordained Ministry was established. [It] watches over the smooth running and functioning of the Church. When [it] notices a slippage, a failure, an indiscipline … [it] intervenes to rectify the situation. Otherwise, [it] punishes and even suspends the person or persons concerned.” This philosophy is contrary to the Book of Discipline, which does not give the Board of Ordained Ministry the authority to punish or suspend clergy members.

The Board listed the accusations against Bishimba as follows:

–        “Writing on social networks is a serious breach,

–        Write comments that are discourteous, false, and defamatory,

–        Inciting members to hatred and contempt, slander, shows a lack of a sense of responsibility towards his Church.”

Whether or not there is any merit to the foregoing accusations, they were not handled as the Book of Discipline requires. No complaint was filed. Bishimba was given no notice about the meeting at which these accusations would be discussed. Bishimba had no opportunity to answer the accusations against him. There was no supervisory response or trial, to which Bishimba is entitled. There was no opportunity for an appeal. Bishimba found out about his suspension through a third party who is not even a United Methodist and not a member of the Board.

As a consequence, the Board suspended Bishimba without pay from his position. In contrast to the suspension of Banza Ben, Bishimba’s suspension is open-ended, with no opportunity envisioned for him to defend himself against the Board’s accusation. Furthermore, Bishimba has also been forbidden to receive any money from the annual conference through UMCOR for Covid-19 relief. As a result, he has been hunting for food in the wild and picking up odd jobs to support himself and his family.

Mr. Kasongo Kabange Kaba

Mr. Kasongo Kabange Kaba is a layperson who is a candidate for ordained ministry. He had just finished his bachelor’s degree at Africa University and had decided to study for his master’s degree while continuing in the process toward ordination.

The Board of Ordained Ministry accused Kaba of writing messages on social media that “are offensive and defamatory.” Kaba criticized those in North Katanga he believed were supporting the practice of homosexuality. Kaba also wrote a letter to the Rev. Stan Copeland, pastor of Lover’s Lane UMC in Dallas, clarifying that, when Bishop Mande Muyombo apologized to the LGBTQ community for the vote at the 2019 St. Louis General Conference reaffirming the traditional stance of the church, the bishop did not speak for all Africans (including Kaba). (The letter was later circulated widely by others among leaders and General Conference delegates in Africa.)

In February, the Board “suspend[ed] him from all his activities and ask[ed] the Staff of Africa University to bring him back to the North Katanga Conference to provide ample information. He should never work or study with the recommendation of North Katanga.” Again, Kaba was never informed of the accusations against him and was not given the opportunity to defend himself. The Board acted without having heard from Kaba. It has no authority to prohibit him from studying at Africa University.

Subsequently, Africa University allowed Kaba to continue his studies, since he was admitted and had a private scholarship to study.

No Recourse

The three individuals appealed to the chair of the Board to follow the Discipline. They received no response. Bishop Muyombo immediately began implementing the suspensions, which caused the three to believe Bishop Muyombo would not intervene on their behalf. As a guarantor of the proper enforcement of the provisions of the Book of Discipline in his episcopal area, he should not have acted on the decisions taken illegally by the Board of Ordained Ministry, but referred the matter back to the Board.

Therefore, Banza Ben, Kaba, and Bishimba filed a complaint with the President of the College of Bishops of the Congo Central Conference, Bishop Gabriel Unda, against the chair of the Board of Ordained Ministry and Bishop Muyombo for disobedience to the order and discipline of the church. They received no response from either the chair or the bishop. On June 18, Bishop Unda notified Banza Ben, Bishimba, and Kaba that as President of the Congo Central Conference College of Bishops, he “had no competence to open or activate any lawsuit opposing a United Methodist Bishop.”

In addition to the violations of the Discipline process for handling accusations against clergypersons, the complaint alleges that the Board acted illegally because it was improperly composed. The chair and vice-chair were never elected by the annual conference to the Board and the vice-chair is not even a member of the North Katanga Annual Conference as required by the Discipline. The complaint further alleges the Board did not have a quorum to act at its February meeting as required by the Congo Book of Discipline. Therefore, the complaint alleges, the Board’s actions were not only a violation of fair process requirements, but also improper due to the composition of the Board and the lack of a quorum.

The Story Behind the Story

The underlying issue behind the singling out of some pastors and laity for punishment has to do with the church’s position regarding marriage and human sexuality. The African part of The United Methodist Church is overwhelmingly against condoning the practice of homosexuality in Africa. However, there is an emerging difference of opinion whether the African United Methodists can remain part of the global United Methodist Church if the denomination changes its stance to allow for that practice.

Some leaders, including Bishops Muyombo, Lunge, and Unda, are personally against the practice of homosexuality in Africa. But they believe the African part of the church should stay united to the global denomination, even if same-sex marriage and the ordination of practicing homosexuals are allowed in the U.S. That is why Muyombo promoted the “One Church Plan” to his delegates at the 2019 General Conference. (Most of the delegates, however, voted instead for the “Traditional Plan” that passed the General Conference.) Both Banza Ben and Bishimba attended the 2019 General Conference as delegates, and Kaba attended as an observer. Bishop Muyombo was angry that the three promoted the Traditional Plan instead of the One Church Plan.

Other African UM leaders believe that, if the American part of the UM Church allows the practice of homosexuality, the African part of the church should separate from the denomination and align with a new traditional Methodist denomination that would be formed under the proposed “Protocol for Separation.” These leaders are working with traditionalist leaders in the U.S., Europe, and the Philippines to help prepare for a global traditional Methodist denomination, should the 2021 General Conference enact the Protocol.  These are the leaders who are being punished by their bishops and annual conferences because of their disagreement.

The Result

As in the Central Congo situation, two of the three individuals in the North Katanga Conference have no recourse for the injustice that has been done to them. They are deprived of position and livelihood without due process and in violation of their rights as clergy members of the church. The last hope is that the Council of Bishops would step in and intervene in the complaint against Bishop Muyombo and the chair of the Board of Ordained Ministry.

The three individuals involved in this situation have appealed to Bishop Harvey, president of the Council of Bishops, under ¶ 413.3d.ii.1 of the Book of Discipline to process the complaint against Bishop Muyumbo by appointing three bishops, one from each of three continents, to complete the supervisory response process for the complaint. Discipline ¶ 413.3d.iv allows the full Council of Bishops to take over responsibility of a complaint against a bishop upon a two-thirds vote. But given the reluctance of bishops to “interfere” with a fellow bishop, that kind of intervention is unlikely.

It is this type of violation of the Discipline and the lack of accountability that is causing the separation of The United Methodist Church. The story told in this Perspective is but another example of the kind of malaise that has afflicted our church. When accountability becomes impossible, the only solution is to start over. A new traditional Methodist church will have a more robust accountability mechanism for bishops at the global level. Bishops will be expected to follow the Discipline or face accountability. Those unwilling to live by the Discipline of the church will be unable to align with that new denomination.

Our denominational identity should mean something. Without accountability, we have no identity as a church. If we stand for anything, we end up standing for nothing. If the plan of separation passes the next General Conference, we will have the opportunity to choose what we will stand for.

Thomas Lambrecht is a United Methodist clergyperson and the vice president of Good News.  

Violations in Central Congo

by Steve | Jul 17, 2020 | In the News, Perspective E-Newsletter

Graphic is a screenshot from the Congo Central Conference Facebook page.

By Thomas Lambrecht –

The polarization of The United Methodist Church in the United States is now unfortunately surfacing in the part of the church located in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) – one of at least 17 countries on the continent of Africa to host United Methodist churches. There are 3 million United Methodists in DRC – the largest contingent of Methodism outside the United States.

At last count, there were roughly 6.6 million United Methodists in North America, 5.9 million in Africa, and 200,000 in the Philippines and Europe.

Actions have been taken by two of the four bishops and annual conference boards in the Congo to penalize pastors and lay leaders who are working to promote faithfulness to traditional doctrines and moral teachings. These penalizing actions were taken contrary to the processes required by our Book of Discipline and violated the rights of the persons penalized. Complaints have been filed against the church authorities for these improper actions, but so far, the complaints have been either ignored or no remedy has been provided.

UM Church in the Congo

The primary languages of United Methodists in Congo are French and Kiswahili, which often presents a challenge in communicating with their English-speaking brothers and sisters. In addition, DRC is the same size as the U.S. east of the Mississippi, but with less than 1,000 miles of paved roads, an indicator of the extreme poverty of the country, which naturally affects the church and its ministry there.

The Congo Central Conference has four bishops: Bishop Gabriel Unda (Eastern Congo), Bishop Kasap Owan (Southern Congo and Zambia), Bishop Daniel Lunge (Central Congo), and Bishop Mande Muyombo (North Katanga). Bishop Unda was elected in 2013 and is the president of the Congo College of Bishops. The other three bishops were elected in 2017.

Bishop Kasap is the only bishop of the four who has declared his strong support for the Wesleyan Covenant Association and for the traditionalist position on church doctrine and teachings on marriage and sexuality. The other three bishops supported the “One Church Plan” at the 2019 General Conference in St. Louis, urging their delegates not to vote for the “Traditional Plan” that eventually passed. Reports from delegates, however, indicate that delegations generally voted contrary to their bishops’ advice, which has engendered conflict both within and between the episcopal areas in the Congo.

This Perspective will address some of the actions occurring in Central Congo under Bishop Lunge.

Nicolas Munongo

Nicolas Munongo is a layperson in the West Congo Annual Conference of the Central Congo Episcopal Area who at one time served as a trusted assistant to Bishop Lunge. Because Munongo became aware of some allegations against Bishop Lunge that cannot be made public at this time, Bishop Lunge suspended Munongo as a church member and removed him from his position as assistant. Munongo had also attended a meeting where he heard about the Traditional Plan and became a supporter of that plan, which further angered Lunge and his supporters.

After the 2019 General Conference, Munongo continued to promote the traditional perspective among clergy and lay leaders in Central Congo. When Bishop Muyombo (North Katanga) visited Central Congo and told one of the pastors, Henriette Okele, not to associate with Bishop Kasap (Southern Congo and Zambia) and the conservatives, Munongo reported that information to Kasap. When Kasap confronted Muyombo, he became angry and complained to his ally, Bishop Lunge. Lunge instituted proceedings against Munongo, a layperson, by the West Congo Annual Conference Board of Ordained Ministry. The Board held a hearing without any notice to Munongo and, in his absence, accused Munongo of making “defamatory, derogatory and insulting remarks” about Bishops Muyombo, Lunge, and Unda, designed to “create an unhealthy climate and lead to the division of the Central Conference of Congo and the College of Bishops.”

The Board of Ordained Ministry removed Munongo from his membership in the church as a layperson and forbade him “from performing any act in the name and on behalf of the East Congo Conference of the United Methodist Community in the Central Congo both inside and outside its bodies” and threatened legal action if Munongo failed to comply.

Apart from whether or not Munongo did anything wrong, there are many problems with how the bishop and annual conference handled this situation. First and foremost, neither the bishop nor the Board of Ordained Ministry has any authority to suspend or remove from membership a layperson. The only way a layperson can be penalized is through the complaint and trial process, which was not followed in this instance and over which the Board of Ordained Ministry has no jurisdiction. No formal complaint was filed against Munongo. No supervisory process was held. No trial was held. There was no attempt at a negotiated resolution of the problem. The bishop and annual conference violated Munongo’s rights as guaranteed by the Book of Discipline to fair process and trial. Instead, an arbitrary and punitive action is attempting to deprive Munongo of his membership in the church in an effort to discredit him due to his difference of opinion with the bishop over the Traditional Plan.

The Rev. Louis Loma Otshudi

The Rev. Louis Loma is a pastor in the West Congo Annual Conference. The Board of Ordained Ministry, without the filing of a written complaint, supervisory process, or trial, suspended him in October 2019. He was accused of “defaming” the bishop on social media (WhatsApp). (Loma had criticized Bishop Lunge for supporting the One Church Plan, advocating instead for the Traditional Plan.) Loma was also accused of being part of a “divisionist” group in Central Congo. (Loma identifies as a “conservative” in line with the current position of the Book of Discipline and spoke out against a group of progressive persons who came from the U.S. to meet with leaders in Central Congo.)

Again, regardless of whether Rev. Loma did anything wrong, the process of the Book of Discipline was not followed. There was no formal complaint filed against Loma. There was no supervisory response by the bishop, only a meeting by the Board of Ordained Ministry, of which no notice was given to Loma and no opportunity provided to Loma to rebut or present evidence. No trial was held. Under the Discipline, the Board of Ordained Ministry could only suspend Loma if a complaint was being processed, and then only for 90 to 120 days with pay. Instead, Loma has been suspended without pay for nearly nine months with no complaint or charges being filed. Loma has no recourse in this situation, since a trial was never held and therefore, he cannot appeal the decision. (Additionally, no appeal would have been possible because the Congo Central Conference has elected no central conference committee on appeals.) The Board of Ordained Ministry has violated Loma’s fair process and constitutional rights guaranteed by the Book of Discipline.

The Rev. Henriette Okele

The Rev. Henriette Okele is a pastor in the East Congo Annual Conference. On April 2, the Board of Ordained Ministry suspended her because she attended a meeting of African leaders in Johannesburg, South Africa. The meeting was sponsored by the Africa Initiative, a group formed by African leaders to equip and promote the voice of African United Methodists within the larger denomination. The purpose of the meeting was to explain the provisions of the “Protocol” and its implementing legislation regarding the possible separation of the church and to hear the feedback from African leaders regarding the “Protocol.” (The African Initiative issued a statement following the meeting endorsing the “Protocol” and urging several amendments to it.)

Because Okele attended the meeting without the permission of her superintendent and bishop, and because the meeting “was accompanied by resolutions tending to the division of the United Methodist Church,” she was suspended. The letter of suspension further said that her suspension was “without appeal.”

There is nothing in the Discipline that allows bishops or superintendents to forbid clergy from attending meetings of church leaders for the purpose of understanding issues and proposals coming before the church. This claim of power by Bishop Lunge and other African bishops is an attempt to keep their people uninformed about what is happening in the church. By controlling all the information that is reaching their people, the bishops hope to control what the African church decides to do in response to the actions of General Conference.

Again, the process with Okele violated every aspect of the Discipline’s requirements. No formal complaint was filed against her. There was no supervisory process or attempt to negotiate a just resolution. No trial was held. The Board of Ordained Ministry did not have the authority to suspend Okele at all, let alone without pay. It cannot deprive her of the right of trial and appeal, which is guaranteed by the Restrictive Rules of our church Constitution.

No Recourse

Because of all the violations of fair process and constitutional rights, Munongo, Loma, and Okele appealed to Bishop Lunge to reverse the decisions and require the Boards of Ordained Ministry to handle the situation according to the requirements of the Discipline. Bishop Lunge ignored their appeal.

Therefore, Munongo filed a complaint against the chair of the Board of Ordained Ministry for disobedience to the order and discipline of the church. Bishop Lunge ignored his complaint and declined to process it, refusing even to meet with him and instructing his aides not to allow him in the conference office or to receive any mail from him.

Finally, Munongo filed a complaint against Bishop Lunge for disobedience to the order and discipline of the church for failing to process his previous complaint. The complaint against Lunge went to Bishop Unda as the president of the Congo College of Bishops. In response to the complaint, Bishop Unda met with Munongo, Loma, and Okele and suggested that they should apologize to Bishop Lunge and ask forgiveness. Since they had done nothing wrong, they declined to apologize. Bishop Unda at that point refused to process the complaint, saying that he could not “interfere” in the affairs of another annual conference.

We have heard this line of reasoning from other bishops, who are unwilling to hold a fellow bishop accountable because it would be considered “interference.” Such reasoning is completely contrary to the Wesleyan and Methodist understanding of mutual accountability. It creates an Anglican or Roman Catholic idea of “diocesan bishops,” where each bishop is essentially a law unto themselves in their own diocese. In contrast, United Methodist bishops are general superintendents, having oversight of the whole church, not just their particular annual conference. In Methodism, bishops, clergy, and laity are supposed to be accountable to each other, for the sake of growing in holiness and for the good of the whole church.

We have also seen other instances where a college of bishops refuses to prosecute a complaint against a fellow bishop. It has happened in Africa before and in the Western Jurisdiction. This failure of accountability gives the appearance of episcopal dictatorship and the variations of practices from one annual conference to another that makes the United Methodist identity virtually meaningless.

The practical result of this lack of accountability is the victimization of pastors and laity who dare to think or speak differently than their bishop in some annual conferences. The heavy-handedness and distortions of the truth end up victimizing the whole church. When the Book of Discipline is no longer followed, we are no longer living in a faithful church, but in a church that is subject to the whims and proclivities of its leaders.

These three individuals in the Central Congo episcopal area have no recourse for the injustice that has been done to them. They are deprived of position and livelihood without due process and in violation of their rights as clergy and lay members of the church. The last hope is that the Council of Bishops would step in and intervene in the complaint against Bishop Lunge. But given the reluctance of bishops to “interfere” with a fellow bishop, that kind of intervention is unlikely.

It is this type of violation of the Discipline and the lack of accountability that is causing the separation of The United Methodist Church. The story told in this Perspective is but one example of the kind of malaise that has afflicted our church. When accountability becomes impossible, the only solution is to start over. A new traditional Methodist church will have a more robust accountability mechanism for bishops at the global level. Bishops will be expected to follow the Discipline or face accountability. Those unwilling to live by the Discipline of the church will be unable to align with that new denomination.

Our denominational identity should mean something. Without accountability, we have no identity as a church. If we stand for anything, we end up standing for nothing. If the plan of separation passes the next General Conference, we will have the opportunity to choose what we will stand for.

Thomas Lambrecht is a United Methodist clergyperson  and the vice president of Good News.  

Images of UM Fracture

by Steve | Jul 13, 2020 | In the News, Perspective E-Newsletter

By Thomas Lambrecht –

Screenshot from the “virtual” annual session of the California-Pacific Conference.

The current focus of our denomination is rightly on how to do effective ministry in the midst of a pandemic and how to understand and address racism in our nation and in our church. For most of our pastors and leaders, there is not much bandwidth left to keep abreast of denominational conflicts.

Unfortunately, the conflicts besetting the denomination have not gone away since the 2020 General Conference was postponed until 2021. Rather than honor a spirit of unity with patience before next year’s gathering in Minneapolis, where a new expression of Methodism can be launched, there are decisions made by progressive leaders that continue to sow division within our denomination regarding marriage and sexuality.

Annual Conferences

For example, at this year’s “virtual” gathering of the California-Pacific Annual Conference, the ordination service was conducted in front of an enormous “Reconciling Ministries Network” banner in the sanctuary of the First United Methodist Church of Pasadena. For those watching online, it gave the appearance that the ordination service was being conducted under the guidance of a singular advocacy caucus rather than a worldwide denomination.

In the Mountain Sky Annual Conference, clergy were invited to a “Zoom” webinar entitled: “Let’s Talk: LGBTQ+ Weddings” set for July 15 by the “United Methodist Association of Retired Clergy & Friends” (UMARC). According to the promotional material, the Rev. Harvey Martz, vice chair of the UMARC, declares, “Perhaps there is no better way to repent for past pastoral malpractice than to intentionally reach out to the LGBTQ community, acknowledging past sins, and instituting inclusive wedding policies in our local churches.”

Rather than respecting the fact that there are deeply held, Scriptural beliefs regarding same-sex unions, which are also enshrined in the Discipline as official church policy, these convictions are dismissed as “pastoral malpractice.”

Church Agencies

The General Commission on Religion and Race (GCORR) celebrated Pride Month in June, calling upon the church to “consider the impact of intersectionality,” a “paradigm that addresses the multiple dimensions of identity and social systems as they intersect with one another and relate to inequality (such as racism, genderism, heterosexism, ageism, and classism).” The principle of intersectionality supposes that all forms of discrimination are related, and one must combat them all in order to make progress against any form of discrimination.

“Genderism” is the belief that there are two genders, male and female, not a range of “gender identities.” “Heterosexism” is the belief that heterosexuality is humankind’s God-given manner of experiencing sexual relations. Rather than being harmful discrimination, these two “isms” have been part of our Judeo-Christian understanding of marriage and sexuality for over 3,500 years. Importantly, neither the Bible nor the Church condemns persons who experience gender dysphoria or non-heterosexual attractions. It is when we act on these feelings, inclinations, or temptations that we contravene God’s will.

The primary task of GCORR is to combat racism. That is a task that all United Methodists should affirm. There is a solid basis in both the Bible and the Book of Discipline for upholding equality and fairness for all persons, regardless of race or ethnicity.

But when the agency tasked primarily with overcoming racism instead celebrates and promotes the affirmation of LGBT behavior, that agency violates church policy and forfeits much of its credibility. Both the Bible and our Book of Discipline are clear: we love and affirm every person as created in the image of God, with infinite value and worth. At the same time, we acknowledge certain behaviors as contrary to God’s will for human flourishing.

To use church funds to “promote the acceptance of homosexuality” is contrary to United Methodist policy. At the same time, it is our policy “not to reject or condemn lesbian and gay members and friends.” This is admittedly a balancing act. But in its celebration of Pride Month, GCORR comes down completely on one side of the balance. When agencies such as GCORR contravene by their actions and words the official stance of The United Methodist Church, it is no wonder that individual members and churches are reluctant to enthusiastically pay funds to support the work of the general church. This is yet another example of the general church structure ignoring the will of the church body and disregarding the authority of General Conference.

Screenshot from GCORR’s Facebook page.

Garrett-Evangelical Theological Seminary

In another example of recent violations of church standards, Garrett-Evangelical Theological Seminary (Evanston, Illinois) recently announced it will bestow one of its distinguished alumni awards upon Sue Laurie. As a self-avowed lesbian, Laurie was ineligible for ordination in the UM Church. However, during the 2016 General Conference in Portland, Oregon, Laurie was “ordained” as clergy by a group of friends and colleagues. Although this “ordination” has no official standing in the church, GETS chose to recognize it in their honoring of Laurie by granting her the title “Rev.”

Since at least the 2000 General Conference, Laurie has been a leader in the disruptive demonstrations that halted the work of every conference before 2016. At the 2008 General Conference in Fort Worth, Texas, as an act of protest following the reaffirmation of the denomination’s current stance on marriage and human sexuality, Laurie and her partner, Julie Bruno, married in a sidewalk service outside the convention center.

GETS prepares dozens of clergy to serve in annual conferences of the upper Midwest. The impact such a seminary has in undermining the church’s teachings for generations cannot be underestimated. With its alumni award, GETS once again affirms its stance in opposition to United Methodist standards and policies, despite the fact that GETS receives hundreds of thousands of apportionment dollars each year from the church. This is another reason why UM members and churches are reluctant to wholeheartedly support giving funds to the general church.

Implications

Boards and agencies of the church have been flaunting the will of General Conference for years. Those of us who deal with such adverse actions day in and day out may become accustomed to this constant drumbeat of disobedience. But many United Methodists have been unaware of the blatant nature and common frequency of such actions over the years. It is the buildup of this repeated pattern of disregard for the teachings of Scripture and the decisions of the General Conference, the only body empowered to speak for the whole church, that illustrate the current impasse in our church.

Regardless of current challenges, that impasse is not going away. We remain two churches pretending to be one. Despite the wishful thinking of a few in our church, hoping this division would go away, it will not. Our deep theological differences cannot be overcome by thoughts of unity or appeals to solidarity.

During this time of waiting for the next General Conference to open a pathway to resolve our impasse, Good News and our coalition partners are diligently preparing for the founding of a new Methodist denomination that will reflect the doctrinal and moral commitments of the church through the ages and specifically our Methodist heritage.

We are part of an eternal Kingdom of God, in which there is one Ruler and Source of truth and righteousness. Earthly kingdoms and nations come and go, but the realm of our heavenly Father persists forever. As we prepare for the next iteration of Methodism, we are conscious of being part of that eternal stream. In our day and time, it is to that eternal Kingdom and its Sovereign that we seek to be faithful. If your heart is as our heart, we invite you to join us in this adventure.

Thomas Lambrecht is a United Methodist clergyperson and the vice president of Good News.  

One Step Back

by Steve | Jul 2, 2020 | In the News, Perspective E-Newsletter

By Thomas Lambrecht –

United Methodists in Liberia load supplies as part of the church’s Anti COVID-19 Taskforce. The food relief is supported by UMCOR and other global partners. Photo by E Julu Swen, UM News.

How do Christians deal with discouragement?

Some parts of the United States, as well as some other countries around the world, have recently seen an uptick in the number of Covid-19 cases, with increased hospitalizations and deaths. The increases have led governments to pause steps to reopen the economy and, in some cases, roll back opening steps that had already been taken. Some businesses that were already open have been closed again. People that were back to work are now furloughed or laid off again. Texas, where I live, has been identified as one of the “hot spots” where increases are threatening to go out of control. Hospital capacity is filling up rapidly. Harris County (Houston) has encouraged residents to return to complete lockdown status. Some churches that were open for in-person worship have now closed again, while other churches have once again postponed in-person worship.

This week, I received the following report from a missionary in Honduras, who indicates the situation there is much worse than in the U.S.

Currently in Honduras, we have been under martial law for months, and it will last until at least July 12, or 117 consecutive days. Fines and imprisonments accompany the failure to wear a mask, shopping for food and water is only permitted once every 14 days. All residents must remain in their homes on the 13 days they cannot shop. All residents are confined to their homes from 5 pm on Fridays until 6 am on Sundays. There is no such things as curbside pickup for food. One week, for a few days, I was thrilled to taste a drive-in BIG Mac! That privilege lasted for one week. Millions are starving here.

This turn of events is discouraging on several levels. It is discouraging to see the progress made in containing the virus undone in a few weeks’ time. It is discouraging to see the continued suffering of millions due to very high unemployment and in some cases the lack of food and for others the possibility of being evicted from their homes for inability to pay rent. It is discouraging to see the thousands who suffer from Covid-19, family members who are ill, and people who are still dying alone in a hospital. It is discouraging that, although we may have one or several vaccines by the end of the year, they may not prevent people from getting the virus, only make the symptoms less severe. And of course it will take months for any vaccine to reach the bulk of the population here and around the world. It is discouraging to see people protesting against measures to protect public health, including one protest against wearing masks orchestrated by people carrying guns! It is discouraging to see government leaders giving conflicting directions in the midst of the pandemic. We need to understand this is an unprecedented event for which there is no “playbook,” and our leaders are learning as we go, developing policies on the fly.

It has often been said that the Church is the heart and hands of Jesus to an unbelieving world. Those congregations and ministries that are reaching out during this pandemic to those lacking food, on the verge of homelessness, or grieving for departed loved ones, are truly doing gospel work. “If anyone has material possessions and sees a brother or sister in need but has no pity on them, how can the love of God be in that person? Dear children, let us not love with words or speech but with actions and in truth” (1 John 3:17).

We, the Church, need to be diligent to respond to both the practical and spiritual needs around us.

At the same time, how do we handle such discouragement? We are witnessing in our national and global life what sometimes happens in personal life. We take two steps forward, but then take one step back. It seems like we are making little progress at times in life.

The Apostle Paul has some wonderfully encouraging words for us, born out of his own experience of trial and difficulty during his many missionary journeys.

But we have this treasure in jars of clay to show that this all-surpassing power is from God and not from us. We are hard pressed on every side, but not crushed; perplexed, but not in despair; persecuted, but not abandoned; struck down, but not destroyed. We always carry around in our body the death of Jesus, so that the life of Jesus may also be revealed in our body. For we who are alive are always being given over to death for Jesus’ sake, so that his life may be revealed in our mortal body. … Therefore, we do not lose heart. Though outwardly we are wasting away, yet inwardly we are being renewed day by day. For our light and momentary troubles are achieving for us an eternal glory that far outweighs them all. So we fix our eyes not on what is seen, but on what is unseen. For what is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal. (II Corinthians 4:7-12, 16-18)

What Paul is talking about here is relying upon the power of God when our own power is weak or non-existent. The power of God “surpasses all” but is housed in “jars of clay” — our mortal, human, frail bodies and minds. The power of God working in and through us makes up for what we lack. He is strong when we are weak. He is love when we are tempted to hatred and discord. He is assurance when we are in panic mode. He is everything when it feels like we have nothing.

If we focus on what we have and what we bring, we will surely lose hope. But if we focus on what God has and what he brings, we will not lose hope. God is able when we are not. God works when we cannot. God gives courage when we have lost ours. God is there when we need him the most.

To all outward appearances, says Paul, there are times when it looks like we are wasting away — forgotten, hopeless, hungry, homeless. Yet if we rely upon the Lord, he will renew our spirits inwardly moment by moment, day by day. Even if all should be lost in this world, we have the assurance of an eternity of blessing and joy in the Lord’s presence.

As Paul says, “We live by faith, not by sight” (II Corinthians 5:7). We live with confidence in the unseen realities appropriated only by faith. That makes it easier to cope with the discouraging realities of life in a fallen world, alienated from God even to the point that the fallen creation works to bring disease and death.

Jesus, on the night when he was betrayed, knowing he would pass through unimaginable suffering the next day and knowing what lay ahead for his disciples, said these words:

Peace I leave with you; my peace I give you. I do not give to you as the world gives. Do not let your hearts be troubled and do not be afraid. … I have told you these things, so that in me you may have peace. In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world. (John 14:27, 16:33)

When everything around us or even within us is falling apart, God can give us the “peace that transcends all human understanding” (Philippians 4:7). So when it seems like this trial will go on forever, may the peace of God guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus. And may the Holy Spirit renew and strengthen your faith moment by moment and day by day, as you rely upon him.

May we, the Church, continue to rise up and reach out in love to our hurting communities. In our earthly existence coping with trouble, may the world see the life and love of Jesus shine through us. Seeing Jesus, may they be drawn to him, giving all glory to the Father, who made us for relationship with himself. Even in the midst of a pandemic, God can use us to fulfill his plan and his purpose for us and for his world.

Thomas Lambrecht is a United Methodist clergyperson and the vice president of Good News.  

The Future of Pastoral Training

by Steve | Jun 29, 2020 | In the News, Perspective E-Newsletter

By Thomas Lambrecht –

Dr. William J. Abraham

In a ground-breaking development, Baylor University in Waco, Texas, this week announced the formation of a Wesley House of Studies at its Baptist-oriented Truett Theological Seminary.

Dr. William J. Abraham has been named the inaugural director to establish this new center of pastoral training at a Division-I university reaching students from 90 countries. It will be able to combine the resources of a school solidly committed to an orthodox, evangelical understanding of scriptural Christianity with the dynamic Wesleyan tradition.

“We are on the cusp of a new day for the future of the Wesleyan network of families across the world,” Abraham said. “In order to fulfill the promise in store for us, we urgently need fresh ways of providing the spiritual, practical, and intellectual resources that are essential for the work up ahead.

“Baylor University is a world-class institution, and the creation of a Wesley House of Studies at Baylor University’s George W. Truett Theological Seminary is a landmark development,” he said. “I can think of no better place to be home to a vibrant Wesley House. I am thrilled to play my part in making it a stellar center of excellence that the Holy Spirit can use for reform, renewal, and awakening on a global scale.”

The significance of this development can hardly be overstated. It is in part a response to the acknowledgement that, in general, our United Methodist seminaries have failed the church. That is an overgeneralization, to which there are exceptions, but the truth remains that our seminaries as a whole have not formed a generation of clergy leaders who have led the church to growth and vitality.

In the words of leadership guru John Maxwell, “Everything rises and falls on leadership.” The fact is that our denomination in the U.S. has experienced a consistent decline in membership since 1968 and a more recent drastic decline in participation. Membership in the U.S. is down over 37 percent. United Methodists in 1970 made up 5.8 percent of the U.S. population, but now it is less than half that percentage. Dozens of churches close every year. There are many factors that play into this decline, but one of the most significant is the leadership provided by the 30,000 clergy persons in our denomination. Some are highly effective, but many are not.

In my experience, a major reason for clergy ineffectiveness is the training that is offered to our pastors. Most United Methodist seminary preparation gives insufficient attention to United Methodist doctrine, biblical studies, preaching, and the practice of ministry. Although some steps have been taken to address the need, there is also insufficient mentoring and supervision for clergy in the first ten years of their active ministry after seminary.

Regarding theology and doctrine, nearly all of our UM seminaries take a pluralistic approach. Rather than teaching theology from the viewpoint of our UM doctrinal standards (the Articles of Religion and the Confession of Faith), seminaries are teaching a liberal/progressive theology that downplays or even contradicts our Wesleyan doctrinal foundation. The message that is often proclaimed in our pulpits is a nebulous theology that may be unobjectionable but is also uninspiring and undemanding. Too often, it seems as though the Wesleyan message of the need for personal salvation and the urgency to return to God through the crucified and risen Jesus by the power of the Holy Spirit is replace by a message about how we can make our world a better place through living better lives personally and advocating for a particular kind of political change in our country.

Unfortunately, most of our UM seminaries have become inhospitable environments for students who believe in the primary authority of the Bible and in the validity of our Wesleyan doctrinal heritage. Teaching of the Bible is often destructive rather than constructive. One seminary leader once described the goal of the seminary to deconstruct the faith of its students before putting that faith back together in a new way.

In my experience, UM seminaries are often better at the former than the latter. Students are given many reasons to question the historical accuracy and divine inspiration of the Bible. They are taught that scholars can be the arbiters of what parts of the Bible should be accepted and what parts relegated to irrelevance. Certain key passages are lifted up as the parts of biblical teaching to emphasize, and the Bible is read in light of modern experience, rather than allowed to speak with its own voice — the voice of God. The ability to do proper exegesis and discern the validity of various interpretations of Scripture are often not emphasized. As a result, we have heard from people in the pews that their pastors seem unable to “correctly handle the word of truth” (II Timothy 2:15). Many sermons end up being the pastor’s opinion, perhaps quoting from some recent books they have read, rather than winsomely communicating the teaching of Scripture with passion and power.

There is no question that a prospective pastor cannot learn all they need to know about the practice of ministry in seminary. It takes years of experience and the input and guidance of more experienced pastors to learn how to do ministry. However, seminary can teach the basics and how to think through issues pastorally and theologically. Unfortunately, many seminaries seem unable to do even this, and many pastors make decisions based on “gut feelings” or what might be least offensive to others, rather than being informed by Scripture, theology, and the tradition and experience of the church.

The onset of Covid-19 has upended higher education in general and theological education and the practice of ministry in particular. Suddenly, pastors are being asked to do ministry in ways they were not taught in seminary. Seminaries are being forced to offer education in ways that they were not designed to offer, emphasizing online education and revamping the curriculum to deal with the new ways of doing church. Where previously seminaries have been dipping their toes in the water of online pastoral training, they are now being forced to bodily dive in. The whole model of pastoral training is up for reexamination, and the business model that supported seminary education may not survive the pandemic. In addition, seminaries have seen a drastic decline in the number of students interested in a traditional, three-year on-site seminary education.

In the midst of this ferment in pastoral training, a new Methodist denomination is being prepared. If the 2021 General Conference enacts a plan of separation such as the Protocol for Reconciliation and Grace through Separation, the need for trained pastors in the new denomination will be acute. I am encouraged by the directions that are being developed by those tasked with preparing the skeleton of a new paradigm for pastoral training.

As previously reported by the Wesleyan Covenant Association, the process of ordination may be dramatically shortened, so that nearly every local church will have an ordained clergy person to serve as its pastor. At the same time, there is a commitment to an educated clergy who may be prepared for effective ministry in a variety of ways. In addition to a traditional seminary education, provision would be made for a more comprehensive Course of Study leading to elder’s orders and a hybrid online/in-person program for obtaining a seminary degree. Some of these learning environments are more suitable for combining experiential learning, mentoring, and classroom learning that might lead to greater pastoral effectiveness.

Significantly, the commitment to an educated clergy is being backed up by the intention to provide denominational loans to prospective pastors attending seminary before and during their pastoral service. In return for serving as pastors in the new denomination, those loans would be forgiven over time. The goal is to both incentivize continued education and growth and to eliminate the problem of seminary student debt. Considerable financial resources from apportionments will be needed to ensure effective clergy leadership for the future. Such resources would not go toward blanket grants to schools, but be used to directly support individual students at whatever approved seminary they attend.

Not only will existing seminaries need to shift how they do pastoral training, but there may be a need for new training programs and seminaries that foster education that is biblically based and promotes our traditional Wesleyan understanding of the faith. The new Wesley House at Baylor is one example of this trend. In countries outside the United States, there will be a need to strengthen and further equip existing Methodist seminaries and start new ones where there are none, as well as offer the same support to students preparing for the ministry as that offered to U.S. students.

New developments like the Wesley House at Baylor and new models for pastoral training envisioned by the Wesleyan Covenant Association for a new Methodist denomination give me great hope that God will raise up and equip effective clergy leaders for the next generation to spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ and build his church across the globe. It will be gratifying to be part of a growing, dynamic church once again!

Thomas Lambrecht is a United Methodist clergyperson and the vice president of Good News.