by Steve | May 14, 2018 | In the News, Perspective E-Newsletter, Uncategorized
By Thomas Lambrecht-
On Monday, May 7, the Council of Bishops announced [link] that two of the five amendments to the United Methodist Constitution approved by the 2016 General Conference were defeated by the votes of the annual conferences. In order to amend the Constitution, it takes approval by two-thirds of the General Conference delegates and two-thirds of all the annual conference members. Results on the voting had been anticipated last November, but some annual conferences failed to vote in a timely fashion.
The two amendments that were defeated both related to combatting discrimination, particularly discrimination based on gender. Amendment I lost by less than two-tenths of one percent — by my calculations roughly 65 votes out of over 47,000 ballots cast. Amendment II lost by 5.3 percentage points, or a little more than 2,500 votes out of more than 47,300 ballots cast.
The women bishops issued a pastoral letter lamenting ongoing sexism and resolving to continue working for inclusion. The Rev. Dr. Steve Harper identified misogyny and a chauvinistic theology of God as one major factor in the amendments’ defeat.
These and other overwrought statements are simplistic and ignore other concerns that played a role in the defeat of the amendments.
For fifty years, Good News has been a voice for women’s equality, affirming in particular women as pastors and teachers and highlighting efforts to combat human trafficking and rescue girls and women from oppression. While we are aware that a few evangelical United Methodists oppose women in leadership in the church, we have attempted to clearly advocate for the full equal value and participation of women at all levels of the church.
Amendment I
At the same time, in a statement posted last year, Good News expressed concerns (although not opposition) about the two defeated amendments. Amendment I added a whole new paragraph to the Constitution (which we thought more appropriately belonged in the Social Principles) about the equal value of girls and women, acknowledging a long history of discrimination and making a commitment to eliminate such discrimination. We stated, “While this statement is well-intentioned, and we support its strong emphasis on the equality of women, we are concerned with its theological fuzziness being written into our Constitution. The church’s advocacy for women’s equality is well-stated elsewhere in the Book of Discipline.” In particular, we were concerned that “the second sentence raises theological concerns when it says, ‘it is contrary to Scripture and to logic to say that God is male or female … maleness and femaleness are … not characteristics of the divine.’ Does this mean Jesus is not male? Or does it mean that Jesus, who is obviously male, is not divine? Either position is contrary to our doctrinal standards.”
In response to Harper, I agree that “God is a composite of genders, the essence of Being that is neither defined by or limited to any specific gender.” However, Jesus Christ is fully God as well as fully human. And male/female gender is a characteristic of being human. So Jesus, while God, did have a male gender. That is not a basis for elevating men over women, discriminating against women, or devaluing women in any way. But the statement in the amendment was confusing and theologically inexact. Putting it in the Constitution had the potential for all kinds of adverse unintended consequences.
Amendment II
Amendment II added the words “ability, age, gender, and marital status” to the list of types of persons against which the church cannot discriminate. Good News stated, “While in sympathy with the intentions of the proposed additions, we are concerned about potential unintended consequences of adopting this amendment as presently worded. We encourage careful consideration of the issues involved before adopting this amendment. We would hope to support better wording in the future that could accomplish the purposes in a clearer and less controversial way.”
We had three concerns about Amendment II:
- The word “gender” is no longer understood to be merely a binary (male/female) term. It has recently become a loaded word in Western culture and carries within it connotations of transgender, gender queer, and other perceptions of gender that we do not believe should be granted blanket and unconditional inclusion in the Constitution.
- We are concerned that adding “marital status” without defining the term could be interpreted to give a mandate in our constitution to recognize same-sex marriage or polygamy in those countries that allow such. The current definition of marriage in the Social Principles could be nullified by this Constitutional language.
- The inclusion of “age” could result in the elimination of mandatory retirement for bishops and clergy. There was no discussion of this possibility at General Conference, and we are concerned that this could be an unintended consequence of adopting this amendment. If we are to eliminate mandatory retirement, it should at least be discussed and considered by the General Conference delegates before being approved.
The women bishops “weep for those who are not protected from exclusion in the church because of race, color, gender, national origin, ability, age, marital status, or economic condition.” However, our Constitution already explicitly protects persons from discrimination based on race, color, national origin, status, or economic condition (¶ 4). While discrimination is alive and well in our church for these qualities, defeat of the amendment did not reflect, nor did it increase the likelihood of, such discrimination against these brothers and sisters. We must continue to be vigilant in eradicating such discrimination.
These concerns were also identified by others, including the Rev. Dr. Jerry Kulah in Liberia. The United Methodist Church has numerous other statements in our Constitution and throughout the Book of Discipline that affirm the value and role of women in the church and combat discrimination against women and girls.
A Soap Opera Plot Twist
Now it turns out that the very sentence that caused so much concern in Amendment I was actually deleted by the General Conference and should not have been included in the wording that was put up for ratification in the annual conferences. This colossal error following the 2016 General Conference means that the amendment (with the correct wording) will now have to be voted on again by all the annual conferences.
The deletion of the controversial sentence removes most of the concerns Good News had with this amendment, and we predict it will ultimately pass and be ratified by the annual conferences.
Amendment V
Lost in all the controversy was the approval of Amendment V, which grants the Council of Bishops the power to intervene (by a two-thirds vote) in a complaint process against a bishop. This means that, if the Council of Bishops is unsatisfied with the outcome of the complaint process, it can take over the process and pursue a better outcome.
This amendment was ratified by an 81 percent approval, although the Western Jurisdiction voted against it by an 81 percent margin. The Western Jurisdiction annual conferences were evidently concerned that this amendment would now enable the Council of Bishops to ensure that Bishop Karen Oliveto is eventually removed from office.
Although Good News supported this amendment as a welcome enhancement of the accountability process with bishops who are alleged to have violated the Discipline, I have no illusions that a two-thirds majority of the Council of Bishops is willing to ensure accountability for any bishop, let alone for Bishop Oliveto. Someday, this provision might be helpful, but I do not see it having immediate impact (although I could be wrong).
In short, all the hand-wringing and controversy over the supposed misogyny of United Methodists leading to defeating essential protections for women and girls is a tempest in a teapot. Many protections already exist in our Discipline, and the vast majority of United Methodists are committed to equal valuing and treatment for women and girls. What we are hesitant to approve are vague and confusing statements that lock our church into constitutionally protected language that could have serious unintended consequences. For that, our annual conference members ought to be commended, not criticized.
Tom Lambrecht is a United Methodist clergyperson and the vice president of Good News.
by Steve | May 5, 2018 | In the News, Uncategorized
May 4, 2018 –
This afternoon, the United Methodist Council of Bishops announced that it will submit a report to the special 2019 General Conference that contains all three plans for a way forward considered by the bishops and the Commission on a Way Forward. This will include the Traditionalist Plan, the One Church Plan, and the Connectional Conference Plan.
The Rev. Rob Renfroe
Good News applauds the Council’s decision to include a Traditionalist Plan in their report. “We are glad the bishops will submit an option that represents the mainstream majority of the church,” said the Rev. Rob Renfroe, president of Good News. “This puts the Traditionalist Plan rightfully on an equal footing to be considered by the delegates to the special session along with the bishops’ preferred plan, the One Church Plan, which has been repeatedly rejected by the General Conference in the past. We believe the Traditionalist Plan holds the most hope for a fruitful future for The United Methodist Church.”
While the Council press release declared that a “majority of the Council of Bishops recommends the One Church Plan as the best way forward for The United Methodist Church,” it acknowledged “there is support for each of the three plans within the Council.” According to the release: “While the bishops recommended the One Church Plan they affirmed that the Connectional Conference Plan and the Traditionalist Plan held values that are important to the life and work of the church.”
The most disappointing news coming out of the meeting is that the full details of the plans and accompanying legislative proposals will be released “no later than July 8.” This is the deadline for submitting petitions to the special General Conference. The delay is purportedly due to the need for final editing and translation into the official languages of the General Conference.
“Waiting until July 8 to find out the details of the plans is simply unacceptable,” said the Rev. Thomas Lambrecht, vice president of Good News. “We call upon the Council of Bishops to release at least a summary of the details of the plans before annual conferences begin meeting later this month, so that members of the annual conferences can begin to familiarize themselves with the options available to guide their delegates in making an informed and prayerful decision about our church’s future direction.”
Good News will continue to analyze and publicize information about the three plans as it becomes available.
Council of Bishop’s Press Release HERE.
by Steve | Mar 13, 2018 | Front Page News, In the News, Uncategorized
By Rob Renfroe –
Recently a progressive United Methodist pastor said to me, “I don’t understand why you can’t accept the local option. It lets pastors who want to marry gay couples do so. But it doesn’t compel people like you to perform such ceremonies. It allows annual conferences to ordain married homosexuals where that’s acceptable. But where the context is different – in the South, for example – you’re free not to. I don’t understand why you can’t live with that.”
I think that pastor got to the heart of the matter even though he didn’t realize it. And the heart of the matter is he doesn’t understand classical evangelicals. It has to be frustrating for progressives to come up with an approach they believe to be very reasonable and that allows everyone to do what they desire, only for us to find it unacceptable. After all, what could be more American than letting everyone “have it their way”?
What do progressives not get about us? For starters, we believe the Scriptures really are the word of God. When a pastor holds up a Bible in church and says, “The word of God for the people of God,” we don’t cross our fingers behind our backs, roll our eyes, or snicker when we respond, “Thanks be to God.” We honestly believe the Scriptures are “God-breathed” and, therefore, authoritative for our lives. We don’t think that we know more about salvation, sexuality, or the nature of God than the Bible does. We don’t believe we get to ignore or need to correct the parts of Scripture that a progressive culture finds hard to accept. Consequently, we cannot affirm any solution that allows pastors in the UM Church to teach or act contrary to what God has revealed in his written word. I know that progressive pastors who have been trained in liberal seminaries simply cannot comprehend that we would hold such a high view of Scripture. But that’s what we believe.
Progressives also do not comprehend how offensive it is for us to hear that all they want to do is provide a solution that “contextualizes” the Gospel. If all they meant by “contextualizing the Gospel” was thinking of creative ways to present Christ so that the Gospel spoke to people in different cultural settings, we’d be all for it. Missionaries attend months, if not years, of training to understand the culture they will be ministering in. How you present the Gospel to an atheistic philosophy professor in New England is much different from how you would share Christ with an uneducated, lower caste Hindu in India.
But when progressives talk about contextualizing the Gospel, they don’t mean presenting the same message in different ways. They mean changing the message to fit the values that culture holds dear. In the Bible Belt it’s still OK to teach traditional values because people there still accept marriage as one man and one woman. But in California, progressives tell us, to reach people you must have a liberalized sexual ethic, including the normalization of homosexual behavior and gay marriage. Why? Because people on the West Coast will turn you off if you tell them differently.
What progressives do not understand is that we traditionalists do not have a utilitarian view of truth. We don’t think the truth is whatever works or whatever sells. We don’t see the church as a soft drink company that is trying to offer something for everyone. Proclaiming the Gospel is not like trying to find a flavor that people will buy and decide that if it becomes popular enough, we’ll start selling it. Paul wrote, “You see, we are not like the many hucksters who preach for personal profit. We preach the word of God with sincerity and with Christ’s authority, knowing that God is watching us” (2 Corinthians 2.17). Progressives, true progressives, believe that people are free to create their own truth and whatever works for a person is true for that person. It’s hard for liberals to understand, but it is hurtful for us to see the Gospel treated as something so cheap. It is offensive for us to hear pastors and bishops present the truth of God’s word as a lump of clay that we can fashion into our own image or into the likeness of a fallen and sinful culture. Our job as Paul tells us is not to make the Gospel palatable, but plain.
Progressives also don’t understand how we see the work of the Holy Spirit. A resolution that is coming before my annual conference this May calls upon the church to change our sexual ethic because “the Holy Spirit is doing a new thing.” Evidently, they believe, the Holy Spirit is now revealing that same-gender sexual relations and same-sex marriage are acceptable in God’s sight. Of course, the sponsors of the resolution do not give a single reason to believe this is what the Spirit is doing. They simply state it as a fact.
What they don’t understand is that we will never be persuaded that “the new thing” the Spirit is doing is repealing the written word of God. The Spirit illumines our understanding of God and his will. The Spirit enables us to see in new ways the wonder of what God has done and what he has revealed – and even how these truths apply to our particular settings. But the Spirit never contradicts what the Scriptures teach because the Scriptures are God-breathed. Has God changed his mind, received more light along the way, or become more progressive as the ages have passed? If not, then how can the same God now be revealing a sexual ethic that contradicts what he has previously stated to be his will?
I get that progressives just don’t get us. We believe the Bible, all of it, is the inspired word of God. They don’t. We believe the truth is what it is, not what we make it into. They don’t. We believe that what the Spirit reveals will always be true to the Scriptures. They don’t. We are coming from such different places that I understand it’s difficult for liberals to comprehend how we think.
But what progressives and centrists need to get is this: we will not be able to stay in a church that denies the full inspiration, truth, and authority of the Scriptures. And that’s really what’s behind “the local option.”
That’s why traditional evangelicals continue to press for a faithful church with a sexual ethic that is true to Scripture. Either the UM Church remains committed to God’s word or the UM Church will split. Progressives don’t have to “get” that, but they do need to believe it.
Rob Renfroe is the president and publisher of Good News. He is the co-author with Walter Fenton of the new book titled Are We Really Better Together – An Evangelical Perspective on the Division within the UMC. This book describes just how deep the division is within the United Methodist Church, provides a critique of the various plans the bishops are considering, and gives answers to the most common reasons people give for liberalizing our sexual ethics.
by Steve | Feb 23, 2018 | Uncategorized
Reflecting God’s colorful image
Courtney Lott reviews John Perkins’ One Blood
2018
Our God is a very big God. So big and so creative that a single human never could bare his image perfectly. In his vastness, he uses male and female, black and white, smart and simple, single and married to paint as full a picture as possible of his broad and unsearchable character. In One Blood, Dr. John M. Perkins weaves this truth together with grace and humility, wisdom, and love. He celebrates our ethnic diversity and confronts the sin of racism with both seriousness and gentleness, all the while keeping the gospel of Jesus front and center.
Perkins is a legendary civil rights activist, author, and an evangelical statesman. He is the founder of the famed Voice of Calvary Bible Institute, the Christian Community Development Association, and Harambee Ministries.
Perkins deftly frames his appeal by drawing from scripture. We are ultimately one race, one bright and shining reflection of the godhead. However, in order to justify slavery and subsequent racial structures, we did some illogical leapfrogging. Though steeped in the idea that all individuals are created equal, the slave’s dignity was downplayed in the worst possible sense. This is where the social construction of race came into play.
“[T]here had to be distinctions made between normal folks and this new breed of people that would be treated like animals,” Perkins writes. “The truth is that there is no black race – and there is no white race. So the idea of ‘racial reconciliation’ is a false idea. It’s a lie. It implies that there is more than one race. This is absolutely false. God created only one race – the human race.”
One blood, one race of people who, in all their diversity, produce a more complete picture of the godhead. When I first began to learn about ethnic reconciliation (a phrase Perkins considers more accurate than racial reconciliation), the sheer idea overwhelmed me. But in One Blood Perkins lays out practical steps and devotes an entire chapter to each.
The Measuring Line. Perkins begins with a measuring line, a standard for what the church ought to look like. Citing the great congregation from every tribe, tongue, and nation as seen by John in Revelation 7, he describes experiencing a “prelude to heaven” while visiting Bridgeway Community Church, a multiethnic congregation in Columbia, Maryland.
For Perkins, Bridgeway was a “picture of the oneness and the diversity of the body of Christ … a physical representation of it,” he writes. “And it was glorious! The melting of the cultures was beautiful; the blend of ethnicities was evident across the ranks of the leadership and the membership. And the music carried me away. I saw echoes of the great congregation that will stand around the throne shouting ‘Holy, Holy, Holy! Worthy is the lamb!’”
This particular church modeled biblical, ethnic reconciliation, a vital part of the gospel, according to Perkins. Though Christ came primarily to restore our relationship with God the Father, he also came to restore our relationships with each other. Neglecting this aspect of the kingdom is a grave mistake and does a disservice to Christ’s work.
“This vision for unity is borne on the wings of the good news of the gospel. It’s good news and it’s for all the people,” writes Perkins. “It’s the good news that Luke proclaimed, ‘Do not be afraid; for behold, I bring you good news of great joy which will be for all the people; for today in the city of David there has been born for you a Savior, who is Christ the Lord!’ (Luke 2:10-11). This supernatural announcement is one of the most compelling signs that God intends for His gospel to reach all nations and cultures.”
Angels announced this good news to shepherds first. As social outcasts and caretakers of sheep, they understood their need for a sacrificial lamb, understood what it felt like to be on the margins. Never meant to be an exclusive club, Perkins reminds us that the kingdom of heaven is for all peoples, including those we might be biased against. This message the angels brought was one of hope and reconciliation, both with God and our fellow man.
Looking Back on History. Though the United States started with the idea of equality for all, we quickly got off track, Perkins says. In order to justify slavery, many used the social construction of race, focusing on the ways in which we are different. However, a close look at what scripture has to say about humanity reveals we are far more alike than our physical attributes might indicate. Perkins sites the creation of Adam in his argument that we are, in fact, one race.
“I understood from the Genesis account God’s intimate interaction with Adam when he created him, breathing into him the very breath of life,” writes Perkins. “I understood that God was literally breathing dignity and character into this man Adam … From this one man, Adam, who was created in the very image of God, the entire human race sprang.”
Both scripture and science have been abused in order to perpetuate race theory, a concept that is foundational to racism and countless other ills. These wrongs run deep and at times appear insurmountable. There is, however, hope and Perkins has experienced it personally. After experiencing severe abuse – civil rights arrest and brutality – in his native Mississippi, he never thought he would be able to return to his hometown and the people who wronged him.
Then he met Jesus. “I left Mississippi with hate in my heart,” Perkins writes. “God brought me back with a heart that was overflowing with his love. I had been reconciled to Christ, and he prepared me to return to Mississippi to be reconciled to my white brothers and sisters.”
The love of Christ, the “ultimate reconciler,” is our only hope when it comes to achieving the unity we are called to. This is the foundation upon which Perkins builds the rest of the book. Reconciliation that works is based on the gospel.
One aspect of the gospel we often overlook is the call to corporate lament. As those brought up on the idea of individualism and the American dream, this heavy concept of corporately mourning can be uncomfortable, if not painful. However, if we are to be true to the scriptures we know and love, we must face the reality that Christ calls us to lament. Though looking back on past shame is difficult, confronting our history is often the only way to move forward.
“Scripture was never intended to be used solely for individual application,” Perkins writes. “It was meant for the community of believers. The psalms of lament were meant to be tools in the community worship experience to bring the worshipers into the presence of our God. The lament is his gift to us, his church.”
Confession goes hand in hand with lament. It is in this section that Perkins explains the term “white privilege”— a highly divisive and potentially polarizing term — in a helpful way. Many white Christians might need to confess denying that racism exists and that we benefit from our skin color, he writes. As this is difficult to address without offending, Perkins draws a parallel to the privilege of being a citizen of the United States.
“Through no fault or responsibility of our own, most of us were born in the United States of America,” he writes. “Though poverty does exist in America it exists at a level far above the level of poverty in a Third World country. This could be termed ‘American privilege.’ We are afforded certain advantages just because we live in America. It’s not something that we should feel guilty about, but it is important for us to be aware of these realities … In a similar way being white in this country affords certain advantages that can be easily overlooked.”
We have tried to create God in our own image, says Perkins. Whatever makes us the most comfortable — liberal, conservative, Western, white — we remake Jesus into something that he is not: safe and sanitary. Fear drives us to this mistake and, according to Perkins, this is something else we must confess as sin. White individuals fear losing their power and status, black individuals fear the endless hard work that often doesn’t seem to bear fruit.
But God. Perkins’ refrain is always “but God.” But God’s word speaks into our fears and calls us to the perfect love that casts out all fear. God’s love can empower us to be uncomfortable and reach across the aisle, extending our hearts to one another. It also grants us the power to forgive in a way the world will sit up and notice.
As a profound example of this, Perkins sites the way the congregants of Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, South Carolina, reacted to Dylann Roof, the young white supremacist who opened fire on a Bible study there.
“At Dylann Roof’s bond hearing, the relatives of the victims stood to address him,” Perkins writes. “‘I forgive you.’ ‘I forgive you.’ ‘I forgive you.’ These three words were spoken again and again as the family members of the Charleston church victims spoke to the accused. It was clear that they were struggling with deep emotion and grief. Yet they chose to forgive rather than to hate … many of them saying that they were praying for his soul. The nation watched, spellbound.”
This church’s example was an incredible witness to the world of just how powerful God’s love is. Forgiveness is a painfully difficult thing. It means letting go of resentment for a deep wrong they have committed against you or your loved ones. This is only possible through the power of the Holy Spirit who inhabits the hearts of every believer, Perkins writes, and even with this power, it is still no easy path.
The Weapon of Our Warfare. Throughout One Blood, Perkins constantly models prayer, a practice he calls the weapon of our warfare. He ends each chapter with a cry to the Lord based on the subject he has written on, guiding the reader on a profound and grace-filled journey through a difficult topic. Pastoral in his counsel, he offers practical topics to help guide us in our appeals to the Holy Spirit for reconciliation.
Moreover, Perkins points to numerous examples of pastors and churches that have sought this kind of reconciliation. Motivated by the love of Christ, these men and women have developed more diverse congregations in their communities and strived to better image the great multitude from Revelation.
“It’s going to take intentionally multiethnic and multicultural churches to bust through the chaos and confusion of the present moment and redirect our gaze to the revolutionary gospel of reconciliation,” Perkins writes. “I really believe that each of our souls years for this vision. We want it. We know in our heart of hearts that it is right.”
Courtney Lott was the editorial assistant at Good News when this article was published in 2018.
by Steve | Nov 28, 2017 | In the News, Uncategorized
Today is #GivingTuesday. This is a great reminder that we find our most fulfillment in giving to others. Giving is a way to say “Thank you” to the God who gives us all things.
We invite you to remember Good News with a gift today. Click HERE.
For 50 years, Good News Magazine has been the voice from the pews. Independently-supported, Good News has endeavored to be a reliable source for denominational news and opinion from a decidedly evangelical and traditionalist viewpoint. We ask that you continue to help us be a ministry with warm-hearted advocacy and reliable journalism.
We depend upon your support to help lead United Methodists to a faithful future. We are working hard to advocate for scriptural faithfulness in The United Methodist Church. The next four years will be critical for the next era of our denomination.
We very much appreciate your partnership with us in this vital mission. Your investment in the work of Good News will pay dividends for eternity.
Please pray that God would grant us wisdom to navigate in these vital days ahead. Give today as the Lord leads. Thank you for your prayerful consideration and support for Good News!
–Good News
by Steve | Aug 14, 2017 | In the News, Uncategorized
“To our shame, overt racism is becoming more acceptable in American culture today,” writes Bishop Scott Jones, the United Methodist episcopal leader of the Texas Annual Conference, in his recent pastoral letter. “It is a deep affront to the Greatest Generation that their sacrifice in defeating racist, anti-Semitic Nazism is no longer respected. When Nazi slogans, Nazi salutes and Nazi flags are combined with racist slogans, racist chants and racist flags in public demonstrations Christians must stand up and bear witness to the truth of the Gospel. We must name evil and condemn it before it gathers strength.”
The staff of Good News wholeheartedly agrees with Bishop Jones.
Furthermore, we fully support Bishop Sharma Lewis, the episcopal leader of the Virginia Annual Conference, when she states: “We need to stand together as the people of God and have our voices heard. Our witness is lost when we as Christians do not stand up and advocate, especially in times like this. We need to denounce white supremacy, neo-Nazis and the KKK. No race is superior to any other; as Christians we know that all persons are created equal in the image of God. Our baptismal vows remind us ‘to renounce the spiritual forces of wickedness, reject the evil powers of this world and repent of your sin. Do you accept the freedom and power God gives you to resist evil, injustice and oppression in whatever forms they present themselves?'”
Our prayers are with Heather Heyer’s family and friends as they mourn the loss of a young woman killed for opposing a movement that promotes hatred and division. We also pray for the families of the two Virginia State Troopers, H. Jay Cullen and Berke Bates, who died in the line of duty in a helicopter accident as they monitored the mayhem this past Saturday. We mourn with those who mourn.
“The events in Charlottesville this past weekend are only the latest in a long series of warning signs that our on-going fight against racism needs a response and recommitment from all Christians,” concludes Bishop Jones. “Those of us who are white bear a special responsibility to make sure that our sisters and brothers from other races are supported and affirmed in this scary time and they need to know that they are not the only ones that speak up against bigotry and racism. This is a Christian responsibility.”
We join with our fellow United Methodists in the Wesleyan Covenant Association in our commitment to “work for the elimination of hatred, bigotry and prejudice, and to ensure that God’s best is fully available to every person. We proclaim that the life of Jesus is light for all people, that the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness cannot overcome it.”
We encourage United Methodists to take seriously their spiritual discipleship to confront racism, violence, white supremacy, and the unholy misery and suffering unleashed under the swastika. Love wholeheartedly. Pray for peace.
By Thomas Lambrecht-