by Steve | May 8, 2020 | In the News, Perspective E-Newsletter
By Tom Lambrecht –
The coronavirus pandemic has caused a lot of disruption in our lives, in how our country functions, and in how our churches function, as well. Nowhere was that in greater evidence than in a May 5th “Town Hall” meeting held online by Mainstream UMC, a “centrist” advocacy group within The United Methodist Church. Various presenters appeared from their homes in different parts of the U.S., facilitated by two college students also at home because their college was closed due to the pandemic. This has become the “new normal” for our church, at least in the short-term future. And we may make more use of this kind of “meeting” in the future, now that many of us are at least somewhat more comfortable with the technology.
The event coincided with the originally scheduled opening of the 2020 General Conference, which of course has been postponed until later next year. Those unable to watch the livestream of the Town Hall can watch a recorded version that was promised to eventually have markers to identify the various questions that were discussed.
This Mainstream UMC Town Hall was called to consider how centrists and progressives can pursue their goal of a church that affirms LGBTQ ordination and marriage, in light of the postponement of General Conference. Subtitled “A Call for Grace,” the group proposed ways that they and the whole church could anticipate the reality of separation in the future through actions taken over the next 16 months.
There are several important takeaways from the presentation made during the meeting. Most notable in the “Call for Grace” were two proposals made by Mainstream executive director, the Rev. Mark Holland from Olathe, Kansas.
Continue the Moratorium
First, Holland proposed that the moratorium on complaints and judicial proceedings related to same-sex weddings and clergy being “self-avowed practicing homosexuals” should continue during this delay until the General Conference in 2021. The moratorium would mean that all proceedings or processing of complaints over these issues would be suspended and not carried forward to a trial. That, of course, is in line with what the Protocol for Reconciliation and Grace through Separation calls for. What the Protocol originally envisioned as a four-month moratorium has now turned into perhaps a 20-month moratorium. Just as the terms of bishops and Judicial Council members have been extended in the wake of the General Conference postponement, it makes sense to carry forward the moratorium informally until General Conference can pass it as part of the “package deal” guaranteeing separation.
Of course, the moratorium is only a request at this point, since it depends upon General Conference action to make it binding and official. Many bishops are abiding by the moratorium, but some are not willing to do so. It still depends upon the willingness of the bishop, and the Mainstream UMC advocacy group has instituted a petition drive to convince bishops to go along. The moratorium would really be unnecessary if there were also a moratorium on performing same-sex weddings or ordaining non-celibate LGBTQ persons. The best sign of grace would be for everyone to stand down and not engender further conflict from either “side” by their actions.
Encouragingly, although not part of his formal proposal, Holland also endorsed the Protocol’s agreed moratorium on the closure of churches except for financial non-viability. We continue to hear reports that a few annual conferences are precipitously closing churches that seem to be functioning fine in order to claim the local church’s property and assets. Traditionalists will join Holland in urging that unnecessary church closures should be put on hold until after General Conference.
Allow Local Churches to Separate Now
The second part of Holland’s “Call for Grace” was to suggest that local churches desiring to separate from The United Methodist Church in order to join or form a new traditional Methodist denomination be allowed to depart with their property under the terms of the Protocol, even though General Conference has not yet enacted those terms. The Protocol’s terms are much less onerous and expensive than the current process in the Discipline. Bishops and annual conferences have the discretionary authority to at least partially follow this proposal, but it again depends upon the willingness of the bishop.
While traditionalists will appreciate the gesture and the attempt at even-handedness, this proposal is fraught with difficulty. In annual conferences that are majority traditional in understanding, it would weaken the traditional voice if local churches started departing from the denomination in advance of an annual conference vote. That could jeopardize the ability of the whole annual conference to separate and join the new denomination. The ability to leave under these more generous terms would be welcome in annual conferences where traditional churches find themselves in a small minority. However, these may be the annual conferences least likely to allow for such generous departure terms, absent a General Conference action.
The major provision in the more generous terms for separation by local churches is the ability to transfer their share of unfunded pension liabilities to a new denomination. But no such denomination exists right now for those liabilities to be transferred to, nor can it exist until the General Conference acts. Most traditional churches will be unable to take advantage of this proposal and would prefer to wait until General Conference enacts uniform terms for separation that cover everyone. A piecemeal separation by some traditional churches may not be helpful to the traditional cause. An orderly process of separation that leads to a strong new traditional denomination is the best way forward.
The Protocol Still on Track
Probably the most important takeaway from this Town Hall is the assessment that centrist and progressive leaders still strongly support the Protocol. Centrists such as Holland continue to promote the Protocol (as do traditional organizations like Good News, the Confessing Movement, and the Wesleyan Covenant Association). That means that, despite the delay, the Protocol is still on track to pass General Conference. There is almost universal acknowledgement among General Conference delegates that some form of separation is necessary to resolve our church’s conflict, and the Protocol seems to have the most support of any plan that has been put forward. While there are still 16 months to go, and nothing is certain until General Conference acts, the chances continue to be good that the Protocol will pass.
It is noteworthy that Holland continues to defend the $25 million settlement to be allocated to a new traditional Methodist denomination. He noted that The Episcopal Church and other mainline denominations that separated recently over these same issues have spent tens of millions of dollars in lawsuits. Holland opined (and traditionalists would agree) that money would be better spent seeding new denominations than carrying on legal disputes over property. Crucially, all the terms of the Protocol agreement are interdependent. To substantially change one term would upset the balance of the agreement and throw the whole package into doubt. Thankfully, there are no prominent centrist or progressive leaders calling for changes in the terms of the Protocol.
Many Centrists Are Really Progressives
It became apparent throughout the Town Hall that the agenda for a post-separation United Methodist Church would be unwaveringly progressive. Although the tone of the meeting was reasonable or even irenic at times, there was a strong commitment to ending “discrimination” against LGBTQ persons and relationships. Many centrists appear to think that, while other parts of the global church could continue to have their own rules against same-sex marriage and the ordination of practicing homosexuals, the U.S. church would be largely of one mind and one practice in affirming both.
To this end, Holland promoted the “Christmas Covenant” proposal that would create regional conferences within the global church, allowing each national church to have its own teachings about marriage and human sexuality. One questioner highlighted the apparent hypocrisy in this approach by asking whether a regional conference approach would have been acceptable in extending ordination to women or overcoming racial segregation.
Judging from the Town Hall presentation, it appears that the majority of centrists and progressives would not be comfortable allowing traditional views to prevail in any part of the church for long. Traditionalists who stay in the post-separation United Methodist Church might find their views tolerated on paper, but extremely marginalized in practice.
Thomas Lambrecht is a United Methodist clergyperson and the vice president of Good News.
by Steve | May 4, 2020 | In the News, Perspective E-Newsletter
We are so thankful for the amazing care-givers and first-responders who have stepped into the spotlight during this COVID-19 pandemic. Angela Gleaves, a nurse at Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, Tennessee, posted this uplifting photo on Facebook amid the coronavirus pandemic of her and four of her fellow nurses praying from the hospital’s helipad atop the building: “When you have a few extra minutes at work you take the time to go to the Helipad and pray. We prayed over the staff in our unit as well as all of the hospital employees. We also prayed over the patients and their families during this trying time. We also prayed for all of our colleagues around the world taking care of patients. It felt good to do this with some of my amazing co-workers. We could feel God’s presence in the wind. Know that you are all covered in prayer.”
During these dark and difficult times, please pray for all those who are caring for the sick and dying.
As Paul reminds us, “Do not be anxious about anything, but in every situation, by prayer and petition, with thanksgiving, present your requests to God” (Philippians 4:6).
by Steve | May 4, 2020 | In the News, Perspective E-Newsletter
Rev. Dr. Kevin Watson, Candler School of Theology
By Thomas Lambrecht –
One often hears that Methodism used to believe the “wrong” thing about slavery, the ordination of women, and the affirmation of same-sex relationships, and that Methodism moved to believe the “right” thing about slavery and the ordination of women, leading the way to a more just world. Therefore, the argument goes, Methodism should also move to believe the “right” thing about affirming same-sex relationships.
The implication is that Methodism changed its position based on biblical or theological principles that overcame earlier errors in biblical or theological reasoning. Therefore, Methodism should adopt a new, affirming position on same-sex relationships based on a new biblical or theological interpretation.
Back in January — before the full ramifications of the COVID-19 pandemic became apparent — Dr. Kevin Watson, assistant professor of Wesleyan and Methodist Studies at Candler School of Theology, wrote an important article puncturing this myth of historical progress. One can read his full article in First Things (which I would highly recommend) and a short blog here . I want to delve more deeply into Watson’s argument.
The essence of Watson’s contention is this: “We have been using the Bible to discriminate against gays and lesbians, it is argued, and need to progress in the same way that we aligned ourselves with God’s justice in opposition to slavery and the subordination of women. The problem with this myth is that it is not true. When confronting slavery, racism, and the exclusion of women from ministry, the dominant strain of Methodism actually conformed to the dominant culture. It did not, as the UMC presumptuously ascribes to itself today, lead the way in progress or ‘the transformation of the world.’ On the contrary, United Methodism in the United States was more often transformed by the world” (emphasis original).
Slavery and Racism
Early Methodists had a very strong stance against slavery. John Wesley famously wrote a letter six days before his death encouraging British anti-slavery crusader William Wilberforce to “Go on … till even American slavery (the vilest that ever saw the sun) shall vanish away.” The first U.S. Methodist Book of Doctrines and Discipline forbade the ownership of slaves, and Methodists who owned slaves were required to set them free or be excluded from church membership and participation in the Lord’s Supper.
Compromise arose almost immediately, however, when those leading the church in the South protested that it would be nearly impossible to get anyone there to join the church because slavery was so ingrained in the southern culture and economy. Accommodations were made in the Discipline and enforcement of the remaining restrictions was weak, until things reached a breaking point in 1844. Bishop James Andrew acquired slaves through marriage and was unwilling to resign from the episcopacy. The church split between an abolitionist North and a pro-slavery South, a split that lasted nearly 100 years.
When the northern and southern churches came back together in 1939, one would have assumed that the issue of slavery and race was resolved. However, the price of a reunion of the church was the sanctioning of racial segregation. A new central jurisdiction was created for black pastors and churches, and the whole church was divided up into regional jurisdictions that allowed a continuation of racism and Jim Crow discrimination in parts of the country. Even during the Civil Rights era of the 1960’s, courageous white pastors like Maxie Dunnam and Robert Tuttle who spoke out against racial discrimination were threatened and exiled from their ministry in the South.
It was not until 1968-1972, in the process of the merger that formed The United Methodist Church, that the structural racism of the central jurisdiction was eliminated. Of course, the battle against racism in our hearts and minds continues today. But it was not until the cultural pendulum swung strongly toward desegregation that the Methodist Church acted to remove that structural racism. It followed the movement of the culture; it did not suddenly find a principled opposition to racism.
In Watson’s words, “The churches that merged to create The United Methodist Church should not have caved to cultural pressure to accept and accommodate racism and slavery. They should have stood firm in their theological commitments. The more biblically formed branches of the Wesleyan Holiness family [such as the Wesleyan Church and Free Methodist Church] did just that.” Had we stuck to our original convictions, we may not have grown as large, but we might have had a greater influence on American culture and history. At the very least, we would have been true to our identity in Christ as founded on the truth of God’s word.
Ordination of Women
As Watson puts it, “The story of the ordination of women in American Methodism follows a similar trajectory.” The Methodist Church officially affirmed the ordination of women in 1956, fully 36 years after women were granted the right to vote by the Nineteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. In the post-war years, women in the U.S. gained in status and rights because they had contributed greatly to the war effort and increasingly had jobs outside the home. The cultural shifts and pressures drove the Methodist Church to change its position. As good and beneficial as the recognition of women’s equality was for our church, we were very late to the game.
By contrast, early Methodism and other strands of American Methodism affirmed the leadership of women. John and Charles Wesley’s mother, Susannah, notably led Bible studies and took on other leadership responsibilities, causing John to allow women to serve alongside men in some aspects of leadership in the English Methodist movement. The Wesleyan Church ordained women as early as 1853, only ten years after its founding and over 100 years before the dominant Methodist Church. The Free Methodist Church ordained women in 1891.
“The argument based on the myth of Methodist progress on slavery and race, then the ordination of women, and now same-sex marriage, is therefore bad history. Mainstream Methodism bowed the knee to culture on questions of race and female leadership, rather than leading the way there on the basis of its theological heritage.”
LGBTQ Affirmation
Watson goes on, “The desire by United Methodists in the United States to change the church’s position on same-sex marriage fits this history, not the common myth. As American cultural elites began to embrace gay rights and same-sex marriage, United Methodist leaders in the U.S. began to fall in line. Tellingly, the church has become more liberal first in the places where the dominant culture had already become more politically and socially liberal.”
As a result, “Far from being countercultural, The United Methodist Church and its predecessor bodies have too often functioned like cultural chameleons, changing their values and practices to fit in with the dominant culture. They have not operated with a strong sense of identity grounded in Scripture and tradition, and thus have not been able to face off the unpredictable and changing winds of cultural pressure and change.”
Our church over the decades has been willing to sell its identity for the fleeting reward of being “culturally relevant.” The same motivation is at work today, when we hear the justification, “If we do not change our position on same-sex marriage, we will not be able to attract young people to the church.” We seek to be “relevant” and influence the culture, when in fact we are allowing the culture to influence and shape the church.
We run the danger of being “infants, tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching” and the latest cultural fad. Instead, Scripture urges us, “speaking the truth in love, we will in all things grow up into him who is the Head, that is, Christ” (Ephesians 4:14-15).
Only by growing up into spiritual maturity and finding our identity in Christ can we resist the fickle winds of the world that sometimes blow with the truth and sometimes bluster against it. Our foundation cannot be an ever-changing society, but the never-changing truth of God’s word and Christian tradition.
Thomas Lambrecht is a United Methodist clergyperson and the vice president of Good News.
by Steve | Apr 23, 2020 | In the News, Perspective E-Newsletter
By Tom Lambrecht –
Someone shared a video with me the other day that showed a three-year-old girl sitting in her house by the glass patio door looking out. She repeatedly shouted, “I hate this house! I hate this house! I hate this house!” I think many of us are right there with her.
We are in a time of waiting. Waiting until things get back to “normal.” Waiting until we can see our friends and family in person again. Waiting until we can go shopping or eat out at a restaurant. Waiting until we can join our brothers and sisters in worship live at a church building!
I feel especially sympathetic toward older people and those with underlying health conditions that make them vulnerable to the coronavirus. They are cut off from most real human contact and have the added worry of their physical susceptibility to the disease. Some of them don’t really understand what is going on, only knowing that they cannot be with their families. And some have the added burden of grieving the loss of a spouse or other family member in solitude and without in-person comfort. Maybe they did not even get to see that person before they died.
How long, O Lord?
Our church has an “adopt a senior” program that matches younger people with our seniors to maintain regular contact with them and reassure them of God’s love and care in the midst of this time of isolation. What can your church do to reach out to older and more vulnerable people?
Others are waiting from another experience, that of sheer exhaustion. Many of our frontline health workers and first responders face daily dangers to their health, while working long shifts to care for the sick. They worry about their families catching the virus from them. Many have worked out a plan to live separately from their families so as not to endanger them. For them, the end of this health crisis cannot come soon enough!
How long, O Lord?
Still others are waiting with a sense of helplessness. Many have lost their jobs and have no source of income. Unemployment is just enough to pay one bill, but not all of them. They could lose their home or apartment, car or business. They may have to go to a food distribution center for the first time in their lives in order to have enough to eat. Others are forced by economic necessity to go to work each day, placing themselves in harm’s way in order to provide for their families. Inadequately protected at work, they worry about bringing the virus home to infect those they love. We think first of people in the U.S. in these desperate situations, but many of our fellow United Methodists in other countries are suffering hardship that can soon become life-threatening, particularly in Africa, the Philippines, and Southeast Asia.
How long, O Lord?
Those of us who have been blessed with a secure income can help those in need by channeling our giving through our local church’s relief fund. UMCOR has also established a fund to help suffering and needy people all over the world. The good news is that a dollar goes a lot farther in most of the world’s nations than it used to.
“How long, O Lord?” is the lament that fills the Bible, particularly the Old Testament. Timothy and Julie Tennent (A Meditative Journey through the Psalms, p. 19) remind us that this cry is found nine times throughout the psalms. Most often, the cry boils down to, “how long will my prayers go unanswered?” “How long will I sense God’s absence more than his presence?” “How long will justice be denied?”
Waiting in anguish seems to be part of the human experience. Of course, it is an experience we hate.
When I was growing up, my Dad always had to be everywhere at least fifteen minutes early, just in case “something happened.” We were early to everything — church, school, appointments, visiting family. It seemed at the time as if I spent half my life waiting for something to happen. I grew to hate it, and in adulthood, I usually try to arrive just on time, never early. (Of course, when “something happens,” that plan goes out the window!)
We hate to wait, and view that time as unproductive. Waiting in anguish for something we long for is even worse. In the midst of the waiting, however, we can be assured of two things:
First, God is with us in the waiting. God knows everything about us, including our situation and challenges. God sees. He cares. One of God’s names is “the God who sees” (El Roi). Genesis 16 recounts the story of Hagar, Abraham’s servant, who had to endure the mistreatment of her mistress Sarah in order to receive God’s blessing and protection for her son, Ishmael. In the process, she learned that God is with us and cares about what we are going through. That doesn’t mean that God cuts short the waiting, but it makes the waiting more bearable.
We operate by faith and not by sight. So even when we do not feel God’s presence, we know that he is there. His promises in Scripture are certain. We can count on them. God says, “I will never leave you nor forsake you.” This is such an important promise that he repeats it many times in Scripture: Deuteronomy 31:6-8, Joshua 1:5, Psalm 27:10, Hebrews 13:5 to name a few. We can count on the fact that God is always with us, no matter what we are going through. Those were actually Methodism’s founder John Wesley’s last words on his deathbed, “Best of all, God is with us.”
Second, God uses the waiting times to accomplish his purpose. Sometimes, God causes the waiting to take place. Other times (like the current pandemic), he uses a situation that arises through other causes to accomplish his will.
The history of God’s people is full of waiting times. Abraham waited until he was 99 for God to fulfill his promise of a son with Sarah. The Israelites were enslaved in Egypt for hundreds of years and wandered in the wilderness for 40 years before reaching the Promised Land. The people of Israel waited in exile for 70 years — a lifetime! — before they could return to their homeland. The people of Israel were without the word of the Lord for over 400 years between the time of Malachi (the last book of the Old Testament) and the arrival of John the Baptist to proclaim God’s promise fulfilled. The Church has been waiting 2,000 years for the fulfillment of God’s promise that Jesus will come again to establish his kingdom and create a new heaven and a new earth.
Sometimes, the waiting holds the purpose of building a godly character in the life of those waiting. Other times, the waiting is for the right timing for God’s action. Sometimes, we find out the reason for the waiting. Many other times, we do not get an answer in this lifetime, but hope for clarity in the life to come. Regardless, we can be assured that God is working in and through the challenges, crises, and waiting times of our lives.
“How long, O Lord” is the anguished cry of our hearts. It is a valid cry of longing. God hears our cry. He knows our hearts and our circumstances. He is with us in the midst of life’s struggles, and he will use those struggles to accomplish his will in our lives.
Our role in this pandemic is to trust God with our lives and with the lives of those whom we love. We can patiently wait for the end of this crisis, even as we passionately long for it. In the meantime, we can “do what our hand finds to do” (I Samuel 10:7, Ecclesiastes 9:10) to serve God and others. And we can continue to grow closer to the Lord who loves us and gave himself for us. Only God knows “how long,” but we know the God who knows!
Thomas Lambrecht is a United Methodist clergyperson and the vice president of Good News.
by Steve | Apr 17, 2020 | In the News, Perspective E-Newsletter
By Bishop Frank J. Beard –
“… Give thanks to the Lord, for his love endures forever.”
– II Chronicles 20:21b
Our world is under attack by a ruthless enemy — one that does not come from God. It is the job of every Christian and every church to unify and wage spiritual warfare against this destructive evil until it is defeated.
As I was praying the other morning and lamenting that there was not much we could do against this virus, I sensed in my spirit that as a spiritual leader I was taking the wrong approach. The Lord spoke very plainly to me, “Tell them about the weapons I have provided for them to use.” Like Moses, I argued, but even as I argued seven weapons came to mind.
Our current attack is from a vicious enemy whose primary purpose is death. As Christians we understand that this thief comes only to steal, kill, and destroy (John 10:10). He is a powerful destroyer, but we are not powerless against him or his vices.
God has given every believer an arsenal of weapons for the spiritual battles that we face. The one we serve is the “I AM” God (Exodus 3:14), the one whose very name means, “I will be what you need when you have need.”
The Apostle Paul reminds us in 2 Corinthians 10:3-4 that as followers of Christ we do not wage war as the world does. We have spiritual weapons because we are engaged in a spiritual battle. Our weapons are never directed at people. According to Paul, “Our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms” (Ephesians 6:12).
Let’s take a brief look at seven weapons used in spiritual warfare.
1. Prayer, Praise, and Worship. In II Chronicles chapter 20, three enemy kings formed an alliance and declared war against King Jehoshaphat. The King turned to the Lord for help and encouraged the nation to fast and pray. The Spirit of the Lord came among them and God gave them this message: “Listen, King Jehoshaphat and all who live in Judah and Jerusalem! This is what the Lord says to you: ‘Do not be afraid or discouraged because of this vast army. For the battle is not yours, but God’s'” (II Chronicles 20:15).
Jehoshaphat assembled an army, but he did an amazingly unconventional thing. He placed the choir and the praise band out front! The power of prayer, praise, and worship was undeniable as the enemy was routed without the King or his soldiers engaging in any physical fisticuffs.
2. The Word of God. Paul compares the Word to a soldier’s sword: “Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God” (Ephesians 6:12). The writer of the book of Hebrews compares God’s word to a double-edged sword: “For the word of God is alive and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart” (Hebrews 4:12).
3. The Name of Jesus. One of our strongest weapons is the name of Jesus. This name, supported by a personal relationship, is a powerful force the enemy recognizes and fears. “Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father” (Philippians 2:9-11).
The Bible tells us that, “The name of the LORD is a fortified tower; the righteous run to it and are safe” (Proverbs 18:10). Both the Old Testament and the New Testament are filled with verses that talk about the power in the name of the Lord. “David said to the Philistine, ‘You come against me with sword and spear and javelin, but I come against you in the name of the Lord Almighty, the God of the armies of Israel, whom you have defied'” (I Samuel 17:45).
4. The Blood of Jesus. Because of the shed blood of Jesus, believers are redeemed, sanctified (set apart), cleansed, forgiven, and justified (brought into right relationship) in the presence of God. Christ’s blood grants us entrance into the very throne room of heaven where we are welcomed as children of God.
The blood of Christ provides victory over all our enemies. “They triumphed over him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony; they did not love their lives so much as to shrink from death” (Revelation 12:11).
5. Our Faith. Hebrews 11 highlights God’s hall of fame of men and women who, through their faith, accomplished seemingly impossible tasks.
Paul describes faith as a shield for believers. “In addition to all this, take up the shield of faith, with which you can extinguish all the flaming arrows of the evil one” (Hebrews 6:16).
The shield of faith protects us from the flaming darts of our enemy. Faith extinguishes the enemy’s fire and turns those sinister plans into blessings. Faith is a spiritual weapon that clears the way for us to receive God’s grace. Faith enables us to triumph over whatever the world throws at us. “… for everyone born of God overcomes the world. This is the victory that has overcome the world, even our faith” (I John 5:4).
6. Our Testimony. One of the last promises Jesus gave to his disciples was that they would receive, from the Holy Spirit, power to be effective witnesses. “But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth” (Acts 1:8).
Jesus promised that their personal testimony would provide the evidence needed to spread the gospel message throughout the world. This power was promised for individual and corporate witnessing. Each personal testimony of the followers of Christ is a highly charged weapon connecting Christians to God’s grace and each other. Each testimony speaks of God’s presence and of the transforming power that defeats the enemy and inspires hope in the downtrodden.
7. Our Unity in Christ. We don’t often think of unity as a spiritual weapon, but it was one of the great prayers Jesus offered on behalf of his followers (John 17). It was also one of the keys that opened the door for the Holy Spirit to be poured out on the believers in Acts chapter two. As those early believers waited in obedience, and as they prayed together day-by-day, an atmosphere of unity was formed.
This tragic pandemic is an opportunity for the followers of Christ around the globe to unite and engage in spiritual warfare that will defeat and destroy the works of darkness. Each Christian, within their own unique context, will need to decide how God has called them to engage in this spiritual battle. Christian leaders will need to listen for the Lord’s voice (and nudging) to decide how best to rally, equip, and deploy the troops under their direction.
We dare not sit silently and idly by, wringing our hands and thinking that we are powerless against this pandemic. Jesus said about us, “You are the light of the world. A town built on a hill cannot be hidden. Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house” (Matthew 5:14-15).
Now is the time to let your light shine for Jesus. People are searching for solutions and seeking answers to this pandemic. Believers are not powerless. We have been given weapons to assist in fighting against this evil. It is our job to stand up, stand out, and proclaim victory even before we see the end of the battle. Let us not shrink back or shy away because we don’t believe we can do anything.
Remember the story of Jehoshaphat. This battle belongs to the Lord. Ultimate victory does not excuse us from engaging and utilizing the weapons God has provided for us to use in defeating this pandemic. Perhaps God has strategically placed us “for such a time as this!”
Frank J. Beard is the Bishop of the Illinois Great Rivers Annual Conference of The United Methodist Church. This article is adapted from his blog.
by Steve | Apr 6, 2020 | In the News, Perspective E-Newsletter
By Tom Lambrecht –
Young woman in a surgical mask.
www.freepik.com
In this time of pandemic and “lockdown,” we are all dealing with new realities that we have never experienced before. As I work from home, I can look out the front window of my house. Half the traffic during the day on our street is delivery trucks (Amazon, FedEx, UPS). Delivery people are our lifeline to the rest of the world!
As many of us isolate ourselves in our homes, we can also isolate ourselves mentally, emotionally, and spiritually. We can get focused on our own needs and those of our family, which rightly should come first. We need to do what it takes to stay safe and avoid passing the virus to others, especially those who are vulnerable.
But in our self-quarantine, we need to continue to broaden our focus beyond ourselves and particularly to those who are weak and vulnerable in this time. In that vein, I was struck by several verses of Psalm 41 that I read earlier this week.
“Blessed are those who have regard for the weak;
the Lord delivers them in times of trouble.
The Lord protects and preserves them –
they are counted among the blessed in the land –
he does not give them over to the desire of their foes.
The Lord sustains them on their sickbed
and restores them from their bed of illness.”
(Psalm 41:1-3)
This psalm, along with many other passages in Scripture, links our concern for the weak and vulnerable with God’s blessing. Particularly relevant today are the promises here that God will “deliver us in times of trouble,” that he will “protect and preserve us,” and that he will “sustain us on our sickbed and restore us from our bed of illness.”
These are precisely the blessings that we need right now and are praying for on behalf of not only ourselves, but all whom we know. And these blessings are in some sense conditioned on our care and concern for the weak among us.
I do not read these promises as some kind of contract that God makes with us, that if we do X, then he will automatically do Y. There are plenty of godly and righteous people who are not healed of their sickness or freed from their trouble. (Of course, with an eternal perspective in mind, sometimes death itself is a healing, as the person is released from suffering and from having to deal with sickness and pain. In heaven there is no sickness, nor will there be in our new bodies in the new heaven and new earth that we read about in Revelation 21-22.)
Rather, I think God is saying that care and concern for the weak will not go unnoticed or unrewarded by God. Sometimes that reward comes in the form of earthly blessing. Other times, that reward is something we experience only in eternity.
In addition, when we care for the weak, we are doing what our heavenly Father does. We serve a God who cares for the birds of the air and flowers of the field (Matthew 6:25-34). He sends his sun and rain on good and evil people (Matthew 5:43-48). He accepts religion as pure and faultless to “look after orphans and widows in their distress” (James 1:27). When we have regard for the weak, we are doing what Christians do, being true to our character as children of our heavenly Father.
I am encouraged by the many stories I read and hear about people who are caring for the vulnerable during this crisis. I heard from one of our Good News board members about a parishioner in her church. The parishioner is an 84-year-old woman who refused to be placed on the list of people needing extra attention during the pandemic. Instead, she insists on being one of their church’s “porch angels,” who is willing to go to the homes of elderly or vulnerable people to deliver supplies or other needed items. Instead of focusing on her own vulnerability, she is reaching out to others in need!
One of the most effective evangelism tools of the early church was their willingness to put their lives on the line to care for their sick neighbors. When plagues came to Rome or other cities, the wealthy fled the city to find safety, sometimes even leaving their own family members. Many Christians stayed to care for the people who were left behind. When people saw how Christians loved in practical and sacrificial ways even strangers who were poor or sick, they were attracted to their God.
As we are able, may we lift our eyes of concern beyond ourselves in these days. Some of us may be able to give practical care for a friend, a neighbor, a homeless person, or someone in our church. Some of us may be blessed with financial resources to keep supporting our church’s ministry, missionaries, and ministries like Good News and others who depend upon us to keep going, especially when others have lost their jobs and can no longer offer that support. All of us can hold up in prayer the weak, the vulnerable, the elderly, and those who are serving others at risk of their own health. Churches are coming up with many creative ways to help those in need. All we need to do is join in.
We remember the encouraging words of Paul, “Now about your love for one another we do not need to write to you, for you yourselves have been taught by God to love each other. And in fact, you do love all of God’s family … Yet we urge you, brothers and sisters, to do so more and more”(I Thessalonians 4:9-10).
Keep doing it!
Thomas Lambrecht is a United Methodist clergyperson and the vice president of Good News.
