tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4615496199721498323.post2310941312343742412..comments2024-03-22T08:29:51.173-05:00Comments on UM & Global: Philip Wingeier-Rayo: The Church Exists for MissionDavid W. Scotthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17024204453848260271noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4615496199721498323.post-60960600565343925692018-04-22T14:34:47.567-05:002018-04-22T14:34:47.567-05:00Philip,
Thanks for your insightful reading of the ...Philip,<br />Thanks for your insightful reading of the history of the autonomy movement within Methodism. You rightly suggest that the forces at work fifty year ago have a continuing influence. It is no coincidence that church autonomy followed periods of international unrest; revolutionary activities in the colonial states in the 1780's, and the forces of decolonization following WW II. The realization of new found freedom made it virtually impossible to maintain allegiance to foreign entities wherever national sovereignty gained formal expression. For British Methodism, John Wesley's admonition of 1784 was followed again in the 1960's completing the full devolution of authority to all churches in newly independent states. For American based Methodism, the major exception was in Africa where bishops, speaking for their churches, opted to remain related to the former missionary structured central conferences until increased stewardship would permit their full independence. There has been no indication of reconsideration of this decision in African UM conferences, but in the Philippines where the only conferences in Asia remain in the central conference relationship to the UMC, a movement for autonomy occasionally surfaces. Autonomy finds new interest with structural implications in the ongoing discussions of The Way Forward Commission in response to the daunting social issue of sexuality, not changing political realities. But rising expressions of nationalism by populist political movements should be of concern not only as they counter basic freedoms democratic principles seek to protect, but threaten what progress has been made toward realizing global cooperation on major social and economic issues. As much as I would unhesitatingly support movements within conferences that lead to greater self determination promised by autonomy, in the present milieux I am reluctant to give encouragement to those regions of the church that are in danger of falling prey to the narrow interests of self serving national political leadership that compromise the significance of what the UMC has just begun to realize in its witness to a global citizenship. <br />Robert J. HarmanRobert Harmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14846547721123021765noreply@blogger.com