Archive: Church must change world through witness, bishop says

Archive: Church must change world through witness, bishop says

Archive: Church must change world through witness, bishop says

UM News
Sept. 28, 2005
By Tom Slack

CINCINNATI (UMNS) – To have an impact on the world, the church of the future must have a confident witness, and its people must be “atonement bearers,” according to retired United Methodist Bishop George Bashore.

“Atonement is not an isolated creedal statement,” Bashore said, “but rather it speaks primarily of life-changing power through costly love. God takes the initiative through Christ with us, and so we take the mind of God in our relationship with a hurting world.”

Bashore spoke to participants in a workshop at the Confessing Movement’s annual conference. The workshop, “A Bishop Looks at the Future of the Church,” was one of several held during the Sept. 22-24 conference, which drew more than 300 people. The Confessing Movement is an unofficial United Methodist caucus working to help the church “retrieve its classical doctrinal identity,” according to the organization’s Web site.

The bishop retired in 2000, after 12 years leading the denomination’s Pittsburgh Area preceded by eight years in the Boston Area. Today he is bishop-in-residence at Mount Lebanon United Methodist Church in Pittsburgh, where he teaches a Wednesday morning Bible study.

Through the class, “I find myself thrust into pastoral care,” Bashore said.

A 50-year member of the congregation asked him, “Will you teach me how to pray? All this time I’ve prayed, but not really.” A young widow whose husband died during the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks asked, “How can I discern what the will of God is? This thing has torn my life completely apart.” Another Wednesday morning Bible student wanted to know more about eternal life, when the possibility of her receiving a kidney transplant became less and less likely.

“A broken heart is always synonymous with a yearning heart,” Bashore said, “about a deep-seated yearning to meet this God and know something about the vitality of this God, and every one of our churches ought to be able to share the stories of faith so that they can know how to meet this God and experience this God.

“Propositional truths are important,” he said. He told those gathered to “contend for the apostolic faith within the United Methodist Church,” adding that the propositional truths “need to become experiential truths in the lives of our people in our congregations. When that happens, the church is going to have an unbelievable future.”

Sociological studies show Christian faith is losing its impact on the values, morality and decision-making processes in our nation, Bashore said. As he sees it, the problem is that society uses the church’s vocabulary and even the church’s concepts and ideals, but without the church’s content.

“The greatest procrastination is that we borrow from Jesus’ concepts and statements, but don’t introduce people to Jesus, the source of the power behind those concepts and statements.”

Children and youth need to be trained theologically, Bashore added. They need to not only learn the propositions of theology but experience the power of the cross in their lives.

Some older people, like the longtime church member who asked to be taught to pray, might need elementary help on how to pray, how to read the Bible, how to share one’s faith. But more than anything else, people young and old need a sense of the grace of God, and integral to that grace is always a cross.

“We are more than lovers of love,” he said. “We are more than persons of hopefulness and wishful thinking. The One who wept over the sons and daughters of Jerusalem had a passionate longing for the righting of souls in relationship to God, so much so that he went to the cross to accomplish it.”

There may be varying theories and understandings of atonement, Bashore said, but atonement is not owned by any part of the theological spectrum. The reality of individual and societal sin, he added, is so demonic and so destructive that all people need to be “atonement bearers” to one another, and all churches must be atonement bearers to the world.

The bishop named six ways in which the church can have an impact through its witness.

  • The church must witness to an eternal God who has “exploded into our world through incarnation.” It must tell the stories of God’s transformation of people who move away from self-centered concerns. He mentioned people in his home church in Lancaster, Pa., who testified in church gatherings, “I met Jesus and he changed my life.”
  • The church must witness through caring for people. Bashore said his return to pastoral care in a congregation shows him the many ways in which relationships are broken, and the church cares for people “when passion and compassion walk hand in hand.” “Do we even know one another?” he asked. “At the same time we build in admonitions to become a family as the body of Christ, we don’t make it happen.”
  • The church must witness through worship. “Boring and lugubrious worship must go!” he said. “We must move beyond battles between traditional and contemporary worship, and grow in our understanding of God’s gifts through cultural diversity. Worship should primarily be evocative and not just a bunch of words. Orthodoxy doesn’t mean ‘right thinking.’ It means ‘right praise.’ And we should never allow people to leave our worship experiences without an opportunity for commitment” – which, he added, might include a signup table to write to legislators as well as an altar call.
  • The church must have a victorious witness to immortality and eternal life. “We will be the community around the world who have that ‘for thou art with me’ confidence about living and dying.”
  • The church must address human hurt in God’s world. The world has become a “glocality,” Bashore said, and relationships depend on the intersection of the global and the local.
  • The church must have a visible witness in the world. Recalling his sermon at the summer 2000 consecration of Bishop Violet Fisher, Bashore told how a rainstorm drove the gathering into a large hotel lobby, where the service was concluded as hotel guests looked on from various levels in the atrium.

The church can have an impact on the world “only if we have a confident witness,” he said. “We must be atonement bearers.”

Tom Slack is director of communications of the United Methodist Church’s West Ohio Annual Conference.

 

 

 

Archive: Church must change world through witness, bishop says

Forward to Our Methodist Heritage

Forward to Our Methodist Heritage (By Charles Keysor)

By Bishop Earl G. Hunt

1996

AFTER DR. JAMES S. STEWART of Edinburgh had preached a few years ago to a large audience of United Methodist ministers and their wives in Charlotte, North Carolina, a young minister (suffering, I fear, from creedal poverty in his  own mind and life) said with devastating honesty, “We were embarrassed by the immensity of his faith!”

This candid comment serves to remind us that the Christian community has come dangerously close to losing its gospel in recent years. The reasons are too complex for easy analysis, and are related to the secularization and the affluence of contemporary life as well as to philosophy and theology. In many instances we clothed what amounted to a fundamentally humanistic  perspective in the historic vestments of the Church and its ministry. Diminishing church attendance and waning effectiveness in evangelism undeniably are traceable to this grave malady of diluted conviction. In fact, the total problem of the contemporary Church, in my opinion, is the various manifestations of Christian agnosticism that have confronted believers in the last few decades .

But, praise God, there are startling and encouraging evidences of a renaissance of faith around the world today. We seem to be engaged deliberately in the gradual recovery of those cardinal beliefs that compose our faith. The days of creedal drought are surely in twilight. This is an obvious return to our Wesleyan position, for the little Oxford don to whose insights we owe our sectarian origin was never in doubt about what he believed regarding God, Christ, sin, forgiveness, prayer, and the holy life! His theology, always firmly based in the Scriptures, was doxology, and his trumpet never gave an uncertain sound.

It has been my observation that significant and lasting social action by the Christian community always and forever rests upon deep and authentic conviction about the great doctrines of the gospel. There is a historic sequence of idea and deed, conviction and mission, faith and action. Before the imperative of the Great Commission came the indicative of God at work through Jesus Christ in his incarnation, his death on the cross, and his  resurrection.

But this has been, in recent decades, the lost movement of the symphony. Now, at long last, we seem about to hear again, in all of its surging power, the whole score of the gospel’s music. If this prognosis is correct, it constitutes the best authentic hope from an earthly standpoint for the survival of the Church.

This renaissance of evangelical Christianity has many faces in our time, but the movement itself is far broader and larger than any one of them. It has already permeated the grass roots of the Church around the earth and is now invading all but the most reluctant of ecclesiastical leadership levels. The Good News movement in the United Methodist Church is one aspect of this development and has articulated effectively its emphasis to our entire  denomination. As one who is himself wholly committed to the historical evangelical doctrines of our faith, with appropriate and courageous social implementation, I am pleased to write this brief foreword for Dr. Keysor’s little volume. His skill as a writer and his deep dedication as a United Methodist Christian are everywhere apparent in the pages that follow. I confidently pray that the message of Our Methodist Heritage may find lodging in many lives, and may result, through God’s Spirit, in an awakened interest in the basic truths of our holy religion.

 

EARL G. HUNT, JR.

Presiding Bishop Nashville (Tenn.) Episcopal Area

United Methodist Church

 

Archive: Church must change world through witness, bishop says

Archive: Give Us Leaders, Not Managers!

Archive: Give Us Leaders, Not Managers!

The UM Tribe needs a few more chiefs, says this Duke University duo

by Robert Wilson and William Willimon

The persons in key positions in the United Methodist Church today are primarily managers and not leaders. Leaders are persons with a vision that they are able to articulate. They can name the needs, desires and hopes of the people. They have a charisma that inspires confidence. The people sense that the leader understands them and is working on their behalf. Because of this, they will follow into new and uncharted paths.

Leaders establish new institutions: they revitalize and reform old ones. They tend to be controversial because they inevitably challenge existing social structures and accepted ways of doing things. Leaders will inspire both love and enmity, but never indifference.

In contrast, managers accept the validity of the institutional status quo and give their attention to its maintenance. They see that everything is done correctly by the proper person and consistent with precedent. In due course, the institution becomes an end in itself, rather than a means to serve a larger goal. Because managers assume the validity of the organization, they expect the constituents to be loyal to and supportive of the institution. This loyalty is expected even if the people do not feel that the institution is serving them and even if they are opposed to what the institution is doing.

Managers’ status is derived from their particular positions. A great deal of time and energy goes into defining and protecting one’s area of responsibility or “turf.” It does not matter whether the manager thinks of himself or herself as a political “liberal” or “conservative”; any change is threatening and will be resisted.

Every institution needs both leaders and managers; there are certain routine tasks that must be attended to. The problem has become that The United Methodist Church is dominated by managers. Maintaining the institution is their major concern. More attention is being given to the form and composition of church organizations than to what these groups are actually accomplishing.

What Jobs Are Considered Important?

The proportion of the Discipline devoted to the general agencies is an indication of the importance given to this part of the church. It is generally accepted, particularly among clergy, that the most significant positions are administrative and bureaucratic. The individual who moves from being a pastor of a local church to a position in a general agency is perceived as being promoted. The reverse is also true, as one who leaves a bureaucratic staff job to become a local church pastor is perceived as having been demoted.

To rectify past practices, which tended to exclude minorities and women, the denomination has been placing them in administrative and bureaucratic posts. A complicated quota system has been set up to ensure that women, ethnic minorities, persons with handicapping conditions, youth, young adults and older adults will be represented as voting members of agency boards.[1] Executives are under considerable pressure to employ minorities and women. It is a curious, almost tragic, circumstance that has led our women and minority members to accept the notion that the way for the church to rectify past inequities is to have more female and minority managers.

The result of all this is that much time and energy goes into management of the institution. This is time and effort that is not going into preaching, winning persons to the Gospel, building up congregations and ministering to people. The sad fact is that the newest group (minorities and women) to move into leadership in the denomination has accepted some of the least desirable and most organizationally conservative values of the persons it is attempting to displace. Nothing is changing but the actors. Minority bureaucrats fail to increase our minority membership. People do not join a congregation saying, “Let’s become United Methodists; they have an agency executive who is Hispanic.” All too often, we have tried to attack the problem of the lack of ethnic evangelization by our church by removing effective ethnic pastors and moving them into positions that cut them off from the possibility of evangelizing anyone into the denominational structure beyond the local church.

The Rhetoric and the Reality

The self-image of most denominational officials is not that of institutional managers. Many of these people probably see themselves as leading the church into the battle against such evils as racism, sexism, agism, “handicapism” (an awkward contribution to the language invented by a church agency), and perhaps even other “isms” yet to be discovered. The rhetoric is that of bold leadership; the reality is that of control and maintenance of the institutional status quo at all levels of the connectional structure and suppression of alternative points of view.

The test of loyalty for both the pastor and the congregation is whether the local church has paid all of the apportionments in full.

One type of information that many cabinets will have available when they consider pastoral appointments is the amount of money apportioned to each charge during the preceding year and the total each paid. Pastors endeavor to persuade their congregations to pay these askings in full because of the positive effect on their next appointment.

Some will argue, “This is as it should be. Apportionments mean mission. In paying our apportionments, a congregation is moving outside its own selfish preoccupation with the pastor’s salary and its internal needs and reaching out to serve the needs of others.” This is not so. Apportionments represent agency salaries as much as they mean mission.

The money provided by the apportionments to the local churches is, in the main, used to pay the administrative expenses and the costs of the programs of the various denominational agencies, including subsidies to other churches and institutions. Many of these institutions are creations to meet the missional needs of an earlier day. Managers administer yesterday’s decisions rather than lead us toward the creation of new institutions for new missional needs. The work of these groups is important and, in general, makes a contribution to the church and to the society. What is significant is that the denominational officials indicate by their actions that it is the most important work that the United Methodist Church does and that it is the main means of missions.

Anything that threatens a part of that institution will be met with strong resistance. A recent example is the conflict between the General Board of Global Ministries and the independent Mission Society for United Methodists. The latter group wants to send missionaries but has encountered determined opposition. The underlying issue is a theological conflict over the nature of the church’s mission, but the battle is being fought over bureaucratic authority.

The General Board of Global Ministries claims it has been designated as the only missionary-sending agency by the General Conference. A number of the bishops have closed ranks with this board and have refused to appoint ordained ministers as staff or missionaries of the new independent agency; yet United Methodist clergy continue to be appointed to a variety of ecumenical and other, sometimes highly partisan, agencies. The difference in this instance is that an unofficial (but totally United Methodist) group is challenging a part of the institution. Here, again, we have an example of the prevailing attitude that makes maintenance of the institution paramount.

The Desired Type of Leader

It is axiomatic that people get the kind of leaders they want. If this is the case, then United Methodists, and particularly the clergy, want managers who will care for and preserve the institution as it is. Managers tend the institutional machinery. They are not threatening because they can be counted on to see that no radical changes will be made and that no tough choices will be faced. They may be dull, but they are comfortable. There will be some conflict, but it will be among people or groups who aspire to be the managers. We are told that there is nothing wrong with the machinery; we just need more female or black or conservative or liberal managers to run the machinery. The names on the doors change, but not the machinery; so nothing changes. The long-term result is a kind of institutional dry rot, which preserves the form after the strength has gone. The end result is, predictably, fatal.

Clergy tend to be comfortable with the denominational managers because they can be trusted to maintain the status quo. They are the main beneficiaries of the present machinery. The laypersons who are elected to denominational offices in both the annual conference and the general church seem quickly to take on the perspective of the clergy. Despite the attempt of United Methodism to include laypersons in and on the various agencies, there is little evidence that it has had any effect in altering either the style or the direction of the denomination. The machinery is greater even than the laity; it turns all of us into managers.

While United Methodist laypeople will patiently tolerate managers as pastors of local churches, they welcome and respond to leaders. Laypersons want their church and their pastor to be effective. Members talking about their minister will often say, “He is a good man, but …” This is followed by some comment that reflects disappointment in a pastor who is uninspiring, unimaginative, and perhaps downright dull.

Dozens of congregations that are in trouble have been studied. These studies reveal that the three factors most important for revitalizing these dying congregations are leadership, leadership, leadership. In a declining congregation, the pastor appears to be depressed, impotent, immobile, not in control, a passive victim of the surrounding neighborhood or of the squabbling lay leaders or of the national bureaucracy; any alibi is given for the pastor’s inability to see a vision of the church and to communicate that vision to the laity. When pressed to lead, these managers become rigidly legalistic, invoking one paragraph in the Discipline as their authority because they lack the leadership skills to convince, to convert and to persuade. On the other hand, researchers can point with joy to a number of United Methodist congregations in which almost any obstacle has been overcome by the firm, visionary, enthusiastic leadership of a pastor who is a leader.

Take the case of the United Methodist church in Ossining, New York.[2] Three years ago their pastor, the Reverend Paul Bowles, was told, “We’re old; we can’t do much.” Today the attitude is different.

For many years, the Ossining church had had no Sunday school. It had been 35 years since the last vacation Bible school. By 1983, there was barely a child left to light the candles on the altar. Hopeless was the tenor of all conversations about the parish’s future.

The pastor went to work. During that summer, he made 375 calls. He also spent time finding and training Sunday school teachers. When the prospective teachers were asked to name their greatest fear, they replied, “What if nobody comes?” But somebody did come; the day Sunday school opened, 30 children came.

Other things happened. The children brought brothers and sisters. Many had never attended Sunday school. Some parents followed. The youth group grew to 20. Ten young people were confirmed in 1985 and 12 in 1986. There are now two children’s choirs. Last summer’s vacation Bible school had 92 participants. The church is now a vital agent of ministry in families and the community.

Growing and effective congregations have ministers who are leaders, not managers. Vital denominations have leaders who lead, who chart new courses, and who inspire persons to follow, not simply to manage the institutional status quo. A strong leader releases strength in all of us. Too many clergy and laity today feel impotent, unable to move because they have been so effectively thwarted in their earnest efforts to get things moving. While we agree with most of Bishop Wilke’s And Are We Yet Alive? in its enthusiastic call for renewal, we predict that such calls will produce only cynicism and despair if we fail to attend to the specific changes that are needed to turn our enthusiasm into the power to be effective. A revitalized United Methodism must place persons in official positions who are leaders and not simply managers, persons who have a vision of what the church can be and who inspire other people to risk making that vision a reality.

What Can Be Done?

If it is true that the United Methodist Church is dominated by managers instead of leaders, the question is what, if anything, can be done to change the situation? A change in the type and style of people now directing the denomination is not only possible, but also absolutely essential.

First and most important, United Methodists must become more assertive. We are too passive and accepting of what church officials do. There is an ethic at work that believes that one should not disagree or make waves. Such action is thought to produce conflict that will greatly damage the church. Mavericks are silenced or driven out. When this is combined with the feeling that persons in the local church cannot influence what the denominational agencies do, the result is a debilitating lethargy.

Furthermore, a kind of halo effect surrounds the minister. Some laypersons are reluctant to challenge the clergy because the laypersons seem to feel that to do so is almost like challenging God. The laity assume that the clergy—by training, vocation or divine gifts-automatically know what is best for the church when, in reality, the clergy may be among the least able to look honestly at the church. This is particularly true in regard to denominational officials. United Methodists, both clergy and laity, must demand leaders and not simply managers who will maintain the institutional status quo.

Second, United Methodist clergy and laity must look carefully at the process by which denominational officials are chosen. The manner by which the selection I made can determine the type of person who will fill the position. The trend has clearly been toward an overt political process, in which persons openly campaign for a denominational office.

This is most obvious in, but not limited to, the election of bishops. The Discipline now permits the formal nomination of episcopal candidates (par.506). Getting such a nomination is the equivalent of winning a primary election. This has resulted in campaign literature that requires the solicitation of funds from supporters or an investment by the candidate. It has also resulted in the exclusion of persons who might serve the church well, but who will not submit to the indignities of a political campaign.

This present trend has shifted the emphasis from persons being called into the difficult role of leader to the finding of persons who can and are willing to put together the right coalitions to be elected. Caucuses and quotas produce managers, not leaders. People who openly campaign for an office in an institution can be counted on to maintain that institution or to make changes favorable to their supporters. They have already had to make so many compromises to be acceptable to different groups in their coalition that they can’t remember what it means to lead.

Third, United Methodists must be willing to find ways to ensure that the persons selected to become church officials are leaders and not just managers. Because an institution employs the type of leaders the constituents want, the people, if they desire, can have a different type of leader. When the institution is not doing well, the people tend to demand a change in leadership. The United Methodist Church has not been doing well. “If my company had lost 13 percent of its business in the last twenty years, I would be out of a job,” one corporate vice president told us. Resistance to ideas for innovation can be expected from those who have presided over our current decline. It is time that the people called the church officials into account and demanded changes.

[1] The 1984 Discipline provides that each annual conference shall nominate at least fifteen persons to a Jurisdictional pool, out of which the managers of the various general agencies are elected. This pool is to contain clergy (including at least one woman), laywomen, laymen, and at least one person from each of the Asian American, Black American, Hispanic American, and Native American minority groups. Age categories include youth, young adults, and older adults. Finally, the nominees must include persons who have a handicapping condition. (par. 805.b)

[2] “Depressed Church Reaches Out for Cure.” People to People. vol. 2, no.1 (Nashville: The United Methodist Publishing House. 1986), p.1. From Rekindling The Flame: Strategies For A Vital United Methodism by William Willimon and Robert Wilson. Copyright © by Abingdon Press. Used by permission.

Archive: Church must change world through witness, bishop says

Archive: Challenging a church out of focus

Challenging a church out of focus

By Bishop Richard Wilke

September/October 1986

In his new best seller, And Are We Yet Alive?, Bishop Richard B. Wilke calls the UMC a “church out of focus.” Following are excerpts from the book featuring both his stinging analysis and his creative suggestions for renewal.

The church that carries the day in the years ahead will not be a disjointed religious group, not a “people’s church.” not a bunch of cultists who rewrite their own philosophies. It will be a church of Jesus Christ marching to the historic messages of Scripture.

We have taken so seriously scientific analysis of the Scriptures. using higher and lower criticism. historical and contextual understanding. that we have often forgotten to hear what God is trying to say to us. We must take the Bible seriously. It is the sufficient rule both of faith and of practice.

We listen to God speak to us as we read. pray and think about the Scriptures. Without the authority of the Bible. we have no authority at all.

Those who want to rewrite the Bible using their current philosophical or sociological perspectives do us a great disservice. If the God of the Bible is not able to lead us to wholeness and justice and freedom. then we are indeed lost.

A friend of mine, pastor of a large metropolitan church, shared with me, with some chagrin. this insightful personal experience. When he was pastor of First United Methodist Church in Dallas. he decided to have Lenten Bible studies in the homes. He taught a class, and so did his associate pastor. Because he was the senior minister. the pastor’s home was filled to capacity the first night. The associate’s was about half filled. Week after week, however, like the disciples of John the Baptist, the pastor’s group diminished. The associate pastor’s study group grew each week. Discouraged and somewhat disappointed. my friend asked his associate what he was doing wrong. He had gone to his seminary notes and was discussing the authorship. the design of the book and the historical context, and he thought people would be very much interested in “studying the Bible.” The associate said in response, “Oh. we’re just reading the Scriptures and asking what God is saying to us that would be helpful in our daily lives.” The difference in approach is the difference between listening for God’s present voice and engaging in an academic exercise. One has spiritual power; the other has intellectual curiosity.

 

On the Missing Gospel Link

Elton Trueblood used to say that we are a “cut-flower culture, drawing on the spiritual resources of  earlier roots.” The image is appropriate  for our church. for we are a cut-flower church. showing certain manifestations of the Gospel, but separated from our nourishment. Trueblood observes that we “cannot reasonably expect to erect a constantly expanding structure of social activism upon a constantly diminishing foundation of faith.”

John Wesley feared that something like this might happen. He wrote in 1786, “I am not afraid that the people called Methodists should ever cease to exist either in Europe or America. But I am afraid. Lest they should only exist as a dead sect, having the form of religion without power.”

If I were to attend 50 United Methodist churches next Sunday morning. what would I hear? Mostly. sermons would expound ethical implications of the Gospel.

The sermons would be good for me. for they would urge me to be kinder to my immediate associates.  and I need that. They would insist that I care more about God’s children who are dying of famine. John Wesley wrote in 1786, “I am not afraid that the people called Methodists should ever cease to exist either in Europe or America. But I am afraid lest they should only exist as a dead sect having the form of religion without the power.” and. after a plethora of covered-dish dinners, I need that.

However, the sermon. in all likelihood, would not tell me what God is doing to me. in me. Through me. The preacher would not tell me how God changes the sinful heart into a heart of faith and love.

We are like cut flowers, no longer nourished by the amazing grace that caused us to blossom in the first place. We act theologically. as if everyone were a child of the kingdom. Yet. Christ has forcefully proclaimed that except we become converted and become as little children. we shall not enter the kingdom of God.

We have become preoccupied with politics. We are energized by economic leverages. We are consumed in cultural realignments. But we have forgotten how to mediate the change which God works in the heart through faith in Christ. We have forgotten how to do it with the poor, the dispossessed, the ethnic minorities, the people with handicapping conditions right in our own home towns. We pass resolutions about the poor. but we do not invite them into our churches. We give bread. but we do not break bread with them.

The theological crisis is precisely whether we are Wesleyans or not. Historians say that in John and Charles Wesley’s experiences, and in the sermons and music that flowed forth. the birthday of a Christian shifted from the time of his baptism to that of conversion. and in that change the dividing line of two great   systems was crossed. We will have to  decide whether a Christian is someone born in America and  baptized by water or a person who knows the gracious work or Christ in his or her heart.

On Runaway Church Machinery

Originally, we were called Methodists because we had a plan, an organization. a method. But now our methodology approaches madness. our organizational genius consumes our most sophisticated  talent. Our structure has become an end in itself. not a means of saving the world.

I became intensely aware or this myopia when I was a pastor. The evangelism committee met, but did not make any calls. The social concerns commission gathered, but did not write any letters. The educational leaders complained about Scriptural illiteracy, but did not read from the Bible. The Council on Ministries assembled to hear reports from the committees, but took little action. The Administrative Board sat in session to approve the budget, but no one was saved. We went home tired,  thinking  we had done our church work.

Annual conferences are plagued by  housekeeping chores. Years ago, conferences would sponsor great missionary rallies, intensive youth programs or significant evangelistic thrusts. Now, in most conferences, committees set philosophical objectives. prepare budgets. interact with other committees and achieve very little. Most of the money is  spent on mileage and meals. In times past, conference committees guided  hospitals. camps and colleges. Now, high-powered administrators and strong boards of trustees do that work. Yet the committees still meet. Earlier, conference boards or education nourished thousands of volunteer teachers with workshops. Teacher training events and lab schools. Now, with a de-emphasis on Christian education and with subcommittees reporting to other committees who report to the Conference Council on Ministries, not much happens.

I was intrigued by Bishop Underwood of Louisiana simply asking his cabinet to set a goal of 150 new adult classes. The cabinet argued it couldn’t be done. The bishop urged them to try.

The result was almost a doubling of the 150 class goal. There was more action than if a hundred committees had met.

The General Church is caught up in its own machinery. It is so complicated and so irrelevant to the local church that most pastors ignore it.

The organizational wheels keep turning. budgets are prepared. personnel are employed. Administrative turf is protected. To those in the local church. it doesn’t matter much; it’s Tike the committees of Congress- interesting. but a long way off. However. the local church, like the taxpayer, pays the bills.

On Small Group Nurture

How many people can you love at any one time? Some psychologists say about 12; that is, to be personally concerned, dedicated enough to help. willing to make regular inquiry and eager to pray for each one daily, about 12 is all anyone can handle. No pastor can pray hard enough, run fast enough or love deeply enough to hold hundreds of people in significant Christian fellowship by his or her own efforts. In the church of the future. the pastor will be training lay leaders, class leaders and spiritual leaders who in turn will have ministries to all kinds of covenant groups in the life of the church. It will be the only way to penetrate  he urban sprawl.

When Dr. William Hinson was appointed to The First Methodist Church in Houston, Texas, a church of 13 or 14 thousand members.  he immediately began to meet with 25 key men at seven o’clock every Thursday morning. and with 25 key women at two-thirty in the afternoon. Almost all of these persons were under 40 years of age. Dr. Hinson disciples these people. He taught them. They talked about what it means to be a Christian in a large city. They talked about Christian stewardship. They prayed. They studied the Bible. They talked about family life and about the pressures of our society. Sometimes someone would say. “I don’t know whether I’m really a Christian or not.” so they talked about that. Someone else would ask for prayer in a business or a family matter. Together they deepened their spiritual lives. Then, Dr. Hinson began to use these people in places of key leadership everywhere in the life of the church. They became lay ministers in training. Last year those key people were so energized that they provided 10 percent of the budget support in that great church.

On Resistance to Evangelism

Our momentum for conversion and compassion for people has been hindered by a spirit of negativism that has swept through the church, particularly through the ministry. We have become experts at being critical of all forms of outreach and evangelization. Hindu theologians and teachers sometimes define God by saying what He is not. That is. they say. “God is not this. God is ministry?– We don’t want just kids. we want the whole family. Raise a hand and sing Praise the Lord? – Too emotional. Call house-to-house in teams of two like the Mormons? – That’s proselytizing. TV evangelism? –  They are always asking for money. The Four Spiritual Laws’! – simplistic and presumptuous. A two-year confirmation class like the Lutherans’! – Too organized; lacks the reality of conversion.” The disclaimers go on and on.

It is as if we wanted to do away with the procreation because sex is involved. In church growth, neither I nor any of us want hucksters. No United Methodist wants to prostitute the Gospel. I remember a story that a story told about William Booth, that Methodist preacher who wanted to do evangelism among the “bob-tag and rag-tail” of London. To the woman who criticized his methods of evangelism, he replied, “Madam I like my way of doing it better than your way of not doing it.”

On Sunday School Decline

Years ago, one of our most able administrators. Bishop William C. Martin, accurately observed that there were many signs of alive congregations. but the one uniform signal, across the board. of a consistently alive, vibrant and growing church was the strength of its church school attendance. During one period of great growth, the 1880s. 1890s and early 1900s. the denomination had twice as many people attending the church schools as were members of the church. Children. youth. adults-visitors. friends. relatives-became a part of the church school and later made commitments to the church.

Even as late as the 1950s and ’60s the church school. by then less than 14 he membership. was still the foundation for new members. Generally. about 70 to 80 percent of all persons received by profession of faith have come out of the church school. Church school attendance has been for us the gateway to Christ and the church.

The decline in our church school began in 1960 and has continued precipitously ever since.

In 1960-1964-4.2 million

In l980-1984-2.1 million

Half of our church school is gone! Over two million people are no longer with us. Those classes were. to use Lyle Schaller’s phrase. “ports of entry” for our churches. Those people had “church growth eyes.”  They invited friends and neighbors to come with them to attend their classes. Eventually many experienced the living Christ in their lives and joined the church.

On Inverted Evangelism

Centripetal witnessing means to invite people into the fellowship and to help them grow toward the center of axis, which is in fact Christ himself: we are talking about inverted evangelism. Witnessing turned inside out. Instead of inviting people to accept Christ, then join the church, then become a part of the body-life of the church. The strategy is 180 degrees in the opposite direction. Bring people into the corporate life; that is. toward the center. Let them experience the joy, the music. the Scriptures. The prayers, the love of the people. As they sing “Amazing Grace,” they may find it. As a person experiences the acceptance of the fellowship, he or she may find the love that will not let go. Then. in the koinonia. As the people grow closer to the axis. their lives will become integrated, whole. and in harmony with God. neighbor and themselves.

This inverted evangelism has a Wesleyan heritage. We preachers tend to idolize the Wesleys and George Whitefield for their preaching; indeed they were centrifugal and did go out into the open fields where the people were. But historians tell us that more conversions took place in the class meetings than ever occurred under the preaching of those noted evangelists. They stirred people up with their preaching. But  then invited them to come to the group meetings. When Wesley was preaching. he would invite people to join a class and would sometimes form a new class that very evening. He would explain that the one condition for class membership was simply “the desire to 0ee the wrath to come. know the acceptance of God and live a higher life.”

On Accountability

Immediately after I was consecrated a bishop, a friend came by to see me. He was president and chief executive officer of a major corporation. a marvelous Christian and a great churchman. He went right to the point; he said, “Dick. any large company that has a track record like the United Methodist Church, whose charts show steady decline, would have been called on the carpet long ago. The board of directors would have demanded emergency meetings, and the corporate executives would have been held accountable. Consultants would have been brought in. Heads would roll. It would not be business as usual.”

Those of us in places of leadership in the United Methodist Church must assume a great deal of responsibility for the decline of our denomination. Bishops. members of general boards, key laypersons, district superintendents and pastors have focused on many matters, but not on the health and well-being of the local church.

Ineffective ministers will have to be weeded out, using leave of absence. disability leave and administrative location. Churches do not exist to serve ministers. No pastor can be permitted to destroy half-a-dozen churches as he or she flounders in personal confusion or professional ineptitude. No longer should a pastor be guaranteed a job for life. It is not good enough to send a grossly ineffective pastor to the boondocks. The small church deserves a “workman who needeth not to be ashamed.” A seminary degree is not a work permit.

Currently. we don’t have money for missionaries. We don’t have money for new churches. We are fat where we should be lean and lean where we should be fat. Something is wrong with a church that has larger boards of directors than it has staff for those boards. Something is askew with a church with more administrative staff than missionaries.

During the annual conference, when the statistician finished reading the negative report to the conference. one bishop got up from his chair and stepped to the floor of the 16 conference. He then led the entire body in a service of contrition. With dignity and power, he guided a confession of sins for failing to lead men and women, girls and boys into a saving relationship with God and into a fellowship experience in the Church of Jesus Christ.

On Being a Burning Church

Many people believe that our business is to run the church. That’s why we’re in trouble. Our job is not to run the church; our job is to save the world. “For God did not send his Son into the world to be its judge, but to be its Savior” (John 3:17, TEV). Oh, let us pray that our young men and women will have visions of a world transformed, that our old men and old women will dream of a church on fire.

I remember a young woman who was burning-burning up inside with guilt, loneliness and sexual cravings. She is an illustration of our world aflame. I’ll call her Jeanette. She walked into my study complaining that she was overeating and gaining weight.

As we talked. she mentioned growing up in a small town. attending UMYF, going to the university, living with a fellow for a couple of years, preparing for a wedding that never happened. When the man walked out, she began to work hard. weep a lot and eat. Dates were one night stands-in the sack and out.

“Dear God,” I prayed, “if only the fire of the Spirit could be ignited within her so she could be at peace.” But I needed help. I needed the apostolic word. the supportive community, the prayers of the faithful, the incisive skill of the Great Physician.

Then I remembered. On Wednesdays. a Christian psychologist came to our church to serve as a trained therapist for anyone in need. He served as a pastoral associate from a local community mental health center.

I thought of our new young adult church school class that had grown out of a Thursday night group.

As Jeanette continued to talk, across my mind flashed the little prayer group of young women from that class and of the young adults who sat together in worship. Suddenly I blurted out, “Jeanette. here’s what I want you to do: I am going to make an appointment with our therapist. Will you see him?

“Yes,” she answered.

“You need Christian friends who will treat you as a human being, not as a disposable object. Will you come to our young adult class?”

She nodded.

“I’m going to have a line young woman call and invite you to the prayer group. Okay? And come to worship if you can.”

l never said much about Jesus.  But the counselor called me and said that after several interviews he and Jeanette concluded their final session with prayer. He literally saw her straighten up her shoulders. dry her eyes and beam with a new joy in her heart. Later when I saw her, she was trim, laughing, surrounded by new-found friends.

Her mother wrote me, “Jeanette has come ‘home.'” She didn’t mean back to her hometown. but home to God, home to her family relationships, home to her true self, home to the church. The fires of guilt, loneliness and sexual cravings had been quenched. A new  ire burned within her.

The United Methodist Church can burn again with the fires of Pentecost. The Holy Spirit can empower us to speak in all the languages of the world. can enable ll women and men, old and young, of every race and nation to be inviting witnesses of peace, and can set aflame the mission of Jesus Christ to save a lost and lonely world. fl

 

Richard B. Wilke is Bishop of the Arkansas area of the United Methodist Church. These excerpts from his book, And Are We Yet Alive? © 1986 by Abingdon Press are used by permission.

 

A Conversation with Bishop Wilke

Bishop Dick Wilke is afraid people will get the wrong Idea about And Are We Yet Alive? “One of the things I fear about my book is that people will say, ‘Well, he’s down on the church.’ I’m hoping they’ll see the great hope and optimism.”

But as Wilke, who presides over United Methodism in Arkansas, begins to tell visitors to his office how the book is being received, his anxiety is replaced by excitement and pleasure.

“How many times have you ever written a two-page, single-spaced letter to any book author?” Bishop Wilke asks the interviewer. Upon receiving a negative reply, he says, “I never have. I never have in my whole life.” Wilke has written three other books and felt lucky to get 20 letters on a book before.

And Are We Yet Alive? Is a different story. The bishop estimates he has received between in the  toning work of God in Christ, [but that) 200 and 250 letters as of mid-July. “It’s just been unbelievable,” he says.

The book has been selling, too. Published in hardcover, more than 35,000 copies have been printed so far. Book tables at last summer’s annual conferences couldn’t keep It in stock. Church publications are writing articles. Speaking invitations are rolling in. And that’s  n  top of the splash Wilke has already made as chairman of the committee trying to turn our membership loss around.

No doubt about it. Bishop Wilke is the talk of the church right now. Still, he’s frustrated over his limited tools for implementing change.

“As a person there’s so little I can do,” he states. “I have no staff. I have no power.”

“My book is a scream in the night. Hopefully, others will hear it and respond to it.” One thing he can do, he asserts, is concentrate on bringing church growth to his own area.

Arkansas’ two annual conferences have adopted a “five star plan,” which includes asking each church to: (1) receive one person on profession of faith for every 75 members; (2) increase Sunday school attendance by five percent; (3) start a new adult Sunday school class  within a year; (4) hold a confirmation or membership training class; and {5) pay apportionments. Last year 85- 90 of the state’s 842 United Methodist churches made the grade.

If anything, Dick Wilke is a man of action. There’s nothing of the politician or the bureaucrat about him. Mincing words and skirting issues are foreign to him. Another thing-the bishop isn’t holding back his influence for future use like many other leaders. Like the young Patrick Henry, who made his “Give me liberty or give me death” speech very early in his career, Wilke feels he must speak up now or never.

Only elected bishop in 1984, he had been the pastor of a Wichita, Kansas congregation. Wilke is still very much in touch with the local church, and doubts whether big national schemes will turn the church around. Neither is he convinced that retooling our theology is the key.

“It isn’t so much that we don’t believe in conversion,” says Wilke, “we just haven’t been preaching it. It’s not that we don’t believe in the atoning work of God in Christ [but that] we haven’t been saying much about it.”

The bishop believes the church’s enthusiasm for social issues and preaching on ethics has blurred the fact that many of our members are not even converted. Nor, he believes, are we reaching outside our contented little fellowships to bring in nonbelievers, especially young people.

“We’re talking about a field white unto the harvest,” he states. “And whether you’re talking about hell as an experience after death, whether you’re talking about the hell of being a 13-year-old prostitute in San Francisco or whether you’re talking about any of the tornness of life between 11 and 17, the need for Christ and faith is just overwhelming.

“So whether or not it’s a matter of theology, I would call it more a matter of will and spirit and intensity. More a matter of driveness. Our church must become driven.

Referring to his book, Bishop Wilke knows words won’t be enough.

“My great fear is that we will talk about theology or sociology, or continuously diagnose the ailing church, that there will be books and pamphlets and speeches made by the thousands on what’s wrong with the church-and nobody will be doing anything. “My great hope is that in local church after local church, people will start reaching out to their neighbors and helping to include them in the life of the fellowship.”

– James S. Robb

 

Archive: Church must change world through witness, bishop says

Archive: New Power for the Church

Archive: New Power for the Church

By Albert Outler
September/October 1984
Good News

Albert Cook Outler (1908-1989) was the preeminent John Wesley scholar in America. He served four pastorates in Georgia before becoming a seminary professor. He taught at Duke and Yale and finally for many years at the Perkins School of Theology in Dallas. A prolific author, Dr. Outler was editor of the four-volume collection of John Wesley’s sermons in Cokesbury’s series, The Works of John Wesley. The following article is adapted from the sermon Dr. Outler preached at historic Lovely Lane Church in Baltimore on Sunday, May 6, 1984 – the Sunday between the two weeks of General Conference. The text for his message was Acts 1:4-8. This Bicentennial Sermon, “Empowered to Witness,” is a timely and prophetic word for the entire church.
–Good News

We are met together here this morning sharing a special heritage at a special moment and in a very special place.

This Sunday is a time “between the times.” It’s the midpoint of our Bicentennial year, the midpoint in this Bicentennial General Conference.

Thus far the General Conference has been largely preoccupied with celebrations and maneuverings. Now come the times of hazard – of shortened debates and of hard decisions, with less time for deliberation than will be needed and more decisions than can be made wisely in the time allotted.

We are proud and thankful for Methodism’s history. And yet, deep down, we also have this uneasy awareness of a certain sense of loss of momentum in our church and in her sense of mission, a certain malaise in her espirit and morale, a shift from a consensual mood to an adversarial mood.

Altered self-image. There are, thank God, many churches across the country and around the globe that are alive and life-giving, but they are too readily thought of as exceptional. We even make the feeble boast that our overall losses last year were less than previously. Time was when we pointed to our statistics of burgeoning growth as proof of God’s special favor. Now we have shifted to the logic of Gideon’s band. Now it is fashionable to argue that it is quality that really counts. We have altered our self-image from that of a church on the march to that of a church in a mode of maintenance.

The world about us grows more and more foreboding. The political processes on which we placed so much reliance seem more and more decrepit and ineffectual. The Western dogmas of progress and human perfectibility are no longer devoutly believed or believable. The shadow of the mushroom cloud grows darker.

After two centuries of success in an atmosphere of triumphalism, we must now recollect that historic Christianity, in all its branches, has had a long history of surmounting successive institutional and cultural crises. Its prime confidence never has been in the teeter-totter of optimism and pessimism. Rather, its assurance has been in the invincible sovereignty of God’s grace and providence – and in the constant action of the Holy Spirit in upholding the Church and empowering her in mission, in good times and bad.

This is the point of our text in the first chapter of Christian church history, “The Acts of the Apostles.” It is the risen Lord’s first promise to his befuddled disciples facing a perplexing future: “After the enduement of the Holy Spirit, (and presumably, because of it) you will receive power, and will then become my ‘martyrs’ (my witnesses): in Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria, and away to the ends of the earth.”

This, as we know, was the secret of Christianity’s survival and growth – in the first age, and ever since. It was a fellowship of men and women  empowered to witness, not their own and not just to each other, but by exclaiming the Gospel to the world that “Jesus Christ is Lord and Savior to the glory of God the Father.” This has also been the secret of every re-invigoration of the Body of Christ ever since – and never more so than the Evangelical Revival of the Wesleys and in American Methodism. What real power we have ever had is spiritual power.

This is Wesley’s point in his Explanatory Notes, on Luke 1:35: “The power of God is put forth by the Holy Spirit as the immediate agent in this work, and so exerts the power of the highest as his own power – who, together with the Father and the Son, is the most High God.”

At the heart of the true Methodist there has always been a robust doctrine of the Trinity! On this special Sunday we are aware of the myriad issues confronting the General Conference. You will understand my temptation to editorialize on at least a few of them. “Keep back thy servant, Lord, from presumptuous sins; let them not have dominion over me.” I recall Wesley’s wry reference to the medieval Spanish king who said that had he been present at the creation he would have had some very helpful suggestion to make.

The point is that there are tensions in the legislative committees and disruptive proposals still hanging in the balance. There is, therefore, a natural tendency to suppose that United Methodism’s fate and future are about to be decided by what happens between now and Friday [the close of General Conference]. So it is, in a very important sense.

But not finally, and here we must be clear. Our real empowerment for effective witness still will come from its only valid source: the Holy Spirit in our hearts and lives and in the church at large. The larger end we have in view, therefore, is not just legislation but empowerment to witness – the proclamation and the exclamation of the Gospel – its manifestations in our sacrificial love.

We should not underestimate the decisive role of General Conferences, but not overestimate either. It may be useful to remember how many “great occasions” have actually been stultified by their consequences, and yet also how many “minor occasions” have been surpassed by their consequences.

Authority from God. The formal authority of an ecclesiastical body and its actions is never decisive in and of itself. “Councils,” said Wesley, “can and have erred.” Authority comes from God through the consensus of the truly faithful, as they are guided by the Holy Spirit, by Holy Scripture, and by the Christian tradition. Ask not, then, how this conference fares. Ask rather how much it will have been refreshed by the Spirit to renew the church with fresh hope and vigor for fruitful Christian mission.

The Christmas Conference, large as it looms today, was a minor affair at the time and made only a slight impression – not to mention the bad example it set for later Methodist Conferences: “We were in great haste (reports Asbury in his Journal) and did much business in a little time.” But what momentous business it was, and what splendid consequences it made possible!

Thus, this Bicentennial conference and all else this year will have to be judged, not by this vote or that – but on whether or not what is now a dispirited church becomes an inspirited one – enlivened for her urgent tasks.

As we enter our Third Century, it is increasingly plain that 19th century conservatism and 20th century liberalism are both spent forces. The former never really understood the richness of Wesley’s doctrine of grace; the latter never really grasped his doctrine of sin and sanctification.

Wesley had ransacked the Christian tradition to come up with a creative and powerful understanding of sin and grace, of justification and sanctification – and we must do likewise. Until Ephesians 2:8 is restored to the heart of our message, “we are saved by grace through faith,” the power of our witness will continue to be enfeebled.

Wesley’s teaching about the Holy Spirit, and also the sources of that teaching in Scripture and tradition, could be newly instructive and relevant for us. It certainly has been at the heart of earlier Methodist renewals whenever they have come.

Christian existence is life in, with, and under the Spirit whose indwelling presence is the divine energy that is the ground of our human spirituality. It is the Spirit’s prevenient grace that is the divine initiative in human hearts.

The Spirit is God within us, witnessing to the grace of assurance of sins forgiven as well as to the supreme grace of love, not as a means but as in itself the end of faith and hope.

It is the Holy Spirit who represents Jesus Christ as Lord to each new age and culture. It is the Holy Spirit who empowers his faithful followers to faithful discipleship in word and life. This was the secret of Methodist outreach in Century One, of Methodism’s prophetic courage and vision in Century Two. It will be the open secret of refreshment and renewed vitality in Century Three.

The Spirit-Wind is blowing across the world in our time and in places that one might have thought unlikely – Indonesia, Korea, Africa, even here at home (on college campuses and even in some churches!).

In the new world unfolding the Christian power of authentic witness will come less from human ingenuity than from eager hearts, minds, and lives open to the leadings of the Spirit. It will come less from mutual exhortation than from the recognition that it is his work in the world to lead men and women into the fullness of their true humanity in Jesus Christ.

It is in this sense that our hopes and prayers for the Bicentennial General Conference must be for its willingness to be led of the Spirit – and not to confuse emotive rhetoric and trendy ideologies with the the Spirit’s leadings.

We are not talking about subjective piety here – but about the objective, operative gifts of the Spirit, especially the gift of “discernment of spirits.” We are talking about the objective, manifold fruits of the Spirit – especially love, joy, and peace and the rest of that laundry list of Christian virtues in Galatians 5:22. Let these be the tests of judgment – of every speech and every vote.

The horizons of the future are already opening up beyond this Conference. They look toward a future that God is still holding open for his human family, whom he will never abandon and yet will never coerce. What will matter most in that future is the recovery of our singlemindedness in mission – the mission of human salvation in all its fullness, for all the peoples in all the world. This is a Gospel beyond class and ideology to dignity and true “liberation,” beyond race and sex to true community, beyond adversarial theologies of all sorts toward justice, righteousness, and the “rule of grace.”

The distinctive design of “The People Called Methodists,” it was once widely agreed, was “to reform the nation and to spread Scriptural holiness over these lands.” Here is a task that demands the best and the most of us all, for it means a truly renewed kind of evangelism, truly renewed conceptions of Christian growth and maturation, renewed commitments to Christian social action, or “social holiness” as Wesley called it. It means preaching and suffering and living and caring, and turning the upside-down world right side up again.

This task of spreading “Scriptural holiness” remains our task, to be helped or hindered by General Conferences and by our boards and agencies but not preempted by any of them. The United Methodist Church exists to manifest the power of the Spirit – not the other way around.

This wonderful old church [Lovely Lane] in which we are worshipping today, with its lilting name and all its indelible memories, is “The Mother Church” of American Methodism. Our presence here is a token of our appreciation of a wondrously rich heritage, and yet also a sign of our commitments to a new future in which our hungers and hopes for yet another Great Awakening may find at least the beginnings of their satisfactions.

The men who came to Baltimore 200 years ago were empowered to witness. So may we still be. They were evangelists. So should we be. They had a vision of a New Zion in the wilderness. Our vision must be of Zion in a new wilderness – of humanity in its current dire disorder. From Baltimore their witness to the Gospel spread to the uttermost parts of the earth, and that now has brought us back to Baltimore once again for a new beginning. But all truly new beginnings are spiritual. They come from inspirited churches, enlivened and enlivening. It is not for us to know or try to control the final ends of the history. We are commissioned to help shape them. The end of it all is the Father’s business.

It is enough for us, says our text, to open our hearts and minds to the inspiration of the Holy Spirit that we may be empowered to give word and life and winsomeness to the true Gospel of Christ, to our nearest neighbors and out to the uttermost human frontier. So may it be here in these next few days and in the years that stretch out beyond. So may it be with all the people called Methodists everywhere in all the world. So may it be with God’s people in every place and every future – secure, as we all may be, in the unfailing providence of God. Amen.

Archive: Church must change world through witness, bishop says

Archives: New Mission Society for UMs Opens for Business in Atlanta (1984)

Archives: New Mission Society for UMs Opens for Business in Atlanta

March/April 1984

Good News

A new missions agency designed to give United Methodists a way to support more evangelical missionary activity opened for business on February 1, in Atlanta.

The Mission Society for United Methodists has been organized by a coalition of UM evangelicals who believe the program of the official General Board of Global Ministries has concentrated mostly on social and political change.

Dr. L.D. Thomas, pastor of Tulsa’s First UM Church and chairman of the new society, explained, “We are not trying to take over what the Board of Global Ministries does in sending missionaries, but we would supplement it by sending more evangelical and traditional Methodist missionaries.”

Organizers of the new agency come from diverse backgrounds. They include Paul Morell, chairman of the Good News-affiliated Evangelical Missions Council; Gerald Anderson, director of the Overseas Ministries Study Center; and Leighton Farrell, pastor of the denomination’s second largest church, Highland Park UM Church in Dallas.

The Mission Society named Rev. H.T. Maclin as its executive director. Maclin served for 31 years as a missionary with the Board of Global Ministries, most recently as area representative for the Southeastern Jurisdiction.

The Rev. Virgil Maybray, executive secretary of the Evangelical Missions Council, also accepted an executive position with the new agency beginning in July. At its January board meeting, the Good News board of directors voted to fold the EMC in favor of the Mission Society and commended Maybray for his effective eight-year tenure with Good News. The EMC will be replaced with a missions and evangelism task force.

The creation of the Mission Society instantly stirred up debate over the mission program of the denomination. Upset church officials supportive  of GBGM characterized the new agency as dangerous and asked for a series of inquiries into the new society.

Michigan Bishop Edsel Ammons sent a “strong personal protest” to the church’s Judicial Council: “It is my judgment that this action not only is misleading and untimely, but illegal.” Ammons said that General Conference should deal with the new agency.

Equally distressed was GBGM president Bishop Jesse DeWitt, who stated the Mission Society will “further erode the established patterns of giving” within the denomination. In an effort that partly backfired, DeWitt asked his fellow bishops in all five jurisdictions to suggest ways to deal with the new agency.

When the five colleges of bishops drafted their responses, the results looked as much like a slap at GBGM as a blow to the Mission Society.

The Southeastern Jurisdiction bishops stated that the new agency reflected the “deep and longstanding concern of many United Methodist people about parts of the philosophy, policy and program, and some of the personnel of the Board of Global Ministries, some of which concern we ourselves share.” The bishops added that they “opposed” the Mission Society, but “deplored” the circumstances that caused the alienation.

The South Central Jurisdiction bishops were equally forceful. “We call attention to prolonged efforts by various United Methodists to  secure serious consideration of a more representative mission program.” The South Central bishops did not condemn the new agency.

Meanwhile, the Mission Society is operating on $150,000 seed money raised by  sympathetic churches. The staff and board are finalizing goals and policies. Its first missionaries may be sent this summer.