Today’s post is by Thomas Kemper, translated by David W. Scott. Kemper is former General Secretary of Global Ministries. This piece appears in its original German in the September 12th issue of unterwegs, the magazine of the Evangelisch-methodistische Kirche (UMC in Germany).
Where were you, dear readers, on September 11, 2001? I was in the office of the EmK-Weltmission (mission agency of the UMC in Germany) in our house in Wuppertal. My children, still elementary school aged, rushed to my desk and were the first to tell me that a plane had flown into a skyscraper in New York. I had traveled to New York many times before, including as director of Global Ministries, the United Methodist Church's agency for mission, which was based there. We had our Weltmission office in the basement of our house, and I quickly walked upstairs, just in time to watch live as the second plane hit the World Trade Centre. This is how it is for almost all of us of a certain age: we remember where we were on September 11, 2001.
Later, I witnessed the tenth anniversary of the terrorist attack in Manhattan itself. I then worked there as the leader of the mission work of our Church. I saw how the deep, dark crater in the heart of Manhattan transformed over many, many years into a new, living center dominated by the so-called Freedom Tower. I witnessed how the very authentic memories of the construction fences and of Trinity Church, where the first aid had been organized on September 11, were replaced by an impressive museum. And I saw how the narratives about what September 11th means led to more and more conflicts and cracks in American society.
Certainly, the most moving place of remembrance are the two basins with constantly flowing water, exactly where the foundations of the twin towers of the World Trade Center had stood. All the names of the victims are engraved. It is an important sign for the relatives, because no traces of most of the dead could be found under the rubble. So, this memorial is aptly called: Reflecting Absence.
Orlando Rodriguez experienced and suffered through this absence. He belongs to Memorial Church, the UMC congregation in White Plains that we visited during our New York years. He comes from Cuba, had already been a Methodist there, and was now also a very committed parishioner in the USA. His wife Phyllis is Jewish but also visited our church services from time to time. On September 11, Greg, their only son, had not managed to make it out of the World Trade Center, where he had his job. He died there with so many others. His remains were never found. All the more important for Phyllis and Orlando was the public collective memory of the victims year after year.
On September 15, just four days after the terrible death of their son, they wrote an open letter in which they said:
"Our son Greg is among the many missing from the World Trade Center attack. Since we heard the news, we have shared moments of grief, comfort, hope, despair... We see our hurt and anger reflected among everybody we meet. We … sense that our government is heading in the direction of violent revenge, with the prospect of sons, daughters, parents, friends in distant lands, dying, suffering, and nursing further grievances against us. It is not the way to go. It will not avenge our son’s death. Not in our son’s name.
“Our son died a victim of an inhuman ideology. Our actions should not serve the same purpose. Let us grieve. Let us reflect and pray. Let us think about a rational response that brings real peace and justice to our world.”
Today, 20 years later, when I read these lines and see the pictures of desperate people from Afghanistan, I am overcome with sorrow and shame that we were not more courageous to stand up for a non-violent response, as Orlando and Phyllis did. Instead, it came to a military response, which not only dramatically worsened relationships between Muslims and Christians but also brought so much more suffering and so much more death to Afghanistan and many other parts of the world. In Afghanistan alone, the US invested $2 trillion in the war. And these days, we are witnessing the final failure of this response.
The letter resulted in the campaign "Not in our son's name." Phyllis met with the mother of Zacarias Moussaoui, one of the co-conspirators of September 11th. She publicly campaigned against the death penalty for Moussaoui. The two mothers, Jewish and Muslim, regularly came together and became friends. Not in the name of our sons! Stop abusing religion to spread hatred and violence. As Martin Luther King said: “Darkness cannot drive out darkness. Only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate, only love can.”
15 years after the terrorist attack, a documentary was released about Phyllis and Orlando and their untiring and intrepid reconciliation work. We showed it at one of our Board meetings in New York. Afterwards, our directors from all over the world were able to ask their questions in a personal conversation with Phyllis and Orlando. Inspired by the two of them, our colleagues went home encouraged to look for non-violent answers to conflicts in the Philippines, Nigeria and many other places.
Once I came very close to terror, in June 2016 in a suicide attack on Istanbul's Ata Türk Airport, where over 40 people died. I can still clearly hear the explosions that tore me out of a short nap in the airport lounge. I see the rushing, fleeing, frightened people around me. I feel my fear as I hid in a kitchen cabinet together with another man with whom I had no common language. We shared the fear because nobody knew how many terrorists were still in the airport. Many hours of anxiety and panic.
After that, still in the lounge and now almost all alone, I wrote on Facebook. I wanted to inform my colleagues that I was safe, because they knew I had flown through Istanbul: "I feel safe now. Now that terror has come so close to me, it brings me even more gratitude for my life and my family. And terror calls for us to work against hatred and terror wherever they show up. It leads us into a deeper solidarity with all those who experience terror and violence not just once, but every day and every night. "
I think of the young, veiled Turkish woman who at some point sat next to me crying bitterly. She told me falteringly in English that she had actually only brought a friend to the airport and then in the chaos had somehow gotten on the wrong side and was now without papers in the international terminal. Now she was very afraid. She could not reach anyone and feared being treated as terrorist. And I think of Sudjit Pereira from Sri Lanka, who still calls me today on every anniversary of the attack, because at the time I lent him my cell phone, with which he could call and reassure his completely distraught family. A common humanity.
Somehow, that Facebook message of mine came to CNN, and I was interviewed that night by the well-known host Anderson Cooper. This resulted in dozens of interviews with broadcasters from all over the world: BBC and Al Jazeera, ABC and some German broadcasters among them. I think a reason for the many requests was that I had already tried on CNN to talk about the meaning of religion. Everywhere I tried to talk about how important it is that we give room for conversation and friendship between the believers of all religions. A network of peace, in which religions are at the forefront.
That must be the lesson and the message of September 11th: religions that contribute to peace and reconciliation and not to more hatred, violence and exclusion. There is no alternative in this global world. Will we, as the Methodist Church, contribute to this goal? Or shall we remain in our own fragmentation and internal strife? We should courageously lean far out of the window of our own comfort, seek dialogue and build bridges.
Dedicated to fostering conversations about the global nature of The United Methodist Church
Showing posts with label Thomas Kemper. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Thomas Kemper. Show all posts
Friday, September 10, 2021
Thomas Kemper: Reflecting on September 11th
Monday, February 15, 2021
"Methodist Mission at 200" book released
The following is adapted from a press release written by Dan Curran for Global Ministries.
Methodist Mission at 200, a new book from United Methodist Global Ministries, seeks to inspire readers to engage in Christian mission today while learning from the challenges of the past. It also marks the bicentennial of the agency that traces its origins to 1819.
One emphasis is on the way effective mission crosses boundaries in friendship. This is a lesson from John Stewart, an African American Methodist preacher whose work with the Wyandotte people in Ohio is credited with inspiring the formation of the Missionary Society of the Methodist Episcopal Church, forerunner to today’s General Board of Global Ministries.
Edited by Thomas Kemper, former general secretary, and Dr. David W. Scott, director of mission theology at Global Ministries and blogmaster for UM & Global, Methodist Mission at 200: Serving Faithfully Amid the Tensions is published by Abingdon Press and is now available for purchase in paperback or as an e-book.
“This is an opportune time to look back at our first 200 years and see how the Methodist mission community grew as a movement,” said Roland Fernandes, general secretary of United Methodist Global Ministries. “People committed to mission have faced serious challenges ranging from cultural shifts to mass migration to world wars to service in unchartered parts of the globe. While commemorating these first 200 years, the book also delves into the mission theology that guides our current work.”
“Methodist Mission at 200 informs but also uplifts and inspires, as together the church seeks to faithfully answer God’s call, encouraged by the stories of those who have come before us,” said Bishop Hee-Soo Jung, Global Ministries board president and leader of the Wisconsin Episcopal Area of The United Methodist Church. “This analysis makes us conscious of the tensions that surround us, and dependent upon the relationships that connect us.”
Methodist Mission at 200: Serving Faithfully Amid the Tensions (ISBN: 9781791015985) delves into the origins of mission and service, shares lessons from 200 years of mission history, offers details about the celebration of the bicentennial of Methodist mission, describes how theology guides present mission practice and analyzes the enduring tensions in mission.
Methodist Mission at 200, a new book from United Methodist Global Ministries, seeks to inspire readers to engage in Christian mission today while learning from the challenges of the past. It also marks the bicentennial of the agency that traces its origins to 1819.
One emphasis is on the way effective mission crosses boundaries in friendship. This is a lesson from John Stewart, an African American Methodist preacher whose work with the Wyandotte people in Ohio is credited with inspiring the formation of the Missionary Society of the Methodist Episcopal Church, forerunner to today’s General Board of Global Ministries.
Edited by Thomas Kemper, former general secretary, and Dr. David W. Scott, director of mission theology at Global Ministries and blogmaster for UM & Global, Methodist Mission at 200: Serving Faithfully Amid the Tensions is published by Abingdon Press and is now available for purchase in paperback or as an e-book.
“This is an opportune time to look back at our first 200 years and see how the Methodist mission community grew as a movement,” said Roland Fernandes, general secretary of United Methodist Global Ministries. “People committed to mission have faced serious challenges ranging from cultural shifts to mass migration to world wars to service in unchartered parts of the globe. While commemorating these first 200 years, the book also delves into the mission theology that guides our current work.”
“Methodist Mission at 200 informs but also uplifts and inspires, as together the church seeks to faithfully answer God’s call, encouraged by the stories of those who have come before us,” said Bishop Hee-Soo Jung, Global Ministries board president and leader of the Wisconsin Episcopal Area of The United Methodist Church. “This analysis makes us conscious of the tensions that surround us, and dependent upon the relationships that connect us.”
Methodist Mission at 200: Serving Faithfully Amid the Tensions (ISBN: 9781791015985) delves into the origins of mission and service, shares lessons from 200 years of mission history, offers details about the celebration of the bicentennial of Methodist mission, describes how theology guides present mission practice and analyzes the enduring tensions in mission.
Friday, July 17, 2020
Thomas Kemper: Mesas Redondas para la Visión y Práctica Misionera Metodista Unida, Parte II
La publicación de blog de hoy está escrita por Thomas Kemper y traducida por Pedro Zavala Chaparro. El Sr. Thomas Kemper actualmente se desempeña como Secretario General de la Junta General de Ministerios Globales de la Iglesia Metodista Unida (GBGM). Esta es la segunda de dos partes. Puedes encontrar la primera parte aquí.
Las Mesas Redondas para la Misión responden a la necesidad de una asociación misionera, de colaboración, con un sentido de mutualidad. La Conferencia Mundial de Misiones de 1947 en Whitby, Ontario, Canadá, tuvo especial importancia en sentar las bases para una nueva comprensión de la colaboración y la planificación de la misión representada por las Mesas Redondas para la Misión.
El lento compromiso Metodista Norteamericano
Las iglesias más antiguas que enviaban misioneros respondieron con diversos grados de entusiasmo y comprensión al mensaje de Whitby. Si bien, el Metodismo estadounidense estuvo bien representado en la conferencia, fue poco afectado por el concepto o la posibilidad práctica de una asociación misionera. Whitby no despertó un sentido de reciprocidad en la misión, entre la Junta de Misiones Metodistas y sus entidades extranjeras fundadas en la misión, agrupadas principalmente en "conferencias centrales" en África, Europa y América Latina.
De hecho, la Iglesia Metodista, formada en 1939, prestó relativamente, poca atención formal a sus componentes en el extranjero hasta la década de 1960. Aunque en 1948 se lanzó un proceso de estudio de estructuras fuera de los Estados Unidos: la Comisión de Estudio del Metodismo en el Extranjero (COSMOS). Después de permanecer durante años en modo de estudio, la Conferencia General de 1964 le pidió a COSMOS que presentara recomendaciones, sobre el futuro de las relaciones con sus iglesias más jóvenes en la próxima Conferencia General. La comisión hizo caso al mandato, pero sus recomendaciones se perdieron en la fusión Metodista-Evangélica con los Hermanos Unidos (EUB, en adelante) de 1968 y COSMOS pasó a la historia, en silencio, en el año de 1972. De allí surgieron muchas Iglesias Metodistas autónomas, en su mayoría nacionales, rediseñadas a partir de conferencias centrales en América Latina y Asia, y las conferencias centrales actuales en África, Europa y Filipinas. Las Conferencias Centrales, las Iglesias Metodistas autónomas y varias Iglesias Unidas forman una reserva más grande de socios misioneros para los Ministerios Globales.
Si los metodistas de América del Norte tardaron en llegar a la misión como asociación, incluso fueron más lentos en adoptar a las mesas redondas como medio de trabajo para la estrategia de la misión, como sucesoras del viejo modelo bilateral, descendente, de arriba hacia abajo. Como director de la Junta General de Ministerios Globales a fines de la década de 1990 y principios de la década de 2000, intenté con poco éxito avanzar en el enfoque de las mesas redondas.
Cuando regresé a Alemania después de ocho años en Brasil, había trabajado en entornos colaborativos; primero ecuménicamente y luego como secretario de misión de la Conferencia Central de Alemania. Nuestra oficina de la misión Metodista Unida Alemana tenía amplios vínculos con socios de misiones globales. Esta apertura a la mutualidad fue el resultado de los antecedentes de la Conferencia Central de Alemania, que surgió (como lo hizo) desde el lado de la EUB y su fusión en 1968. La denominación EUB, relativamente pequeña, estaba más inclinada a que la Iglesia Metodista “más grande” tratara a sus descendientes “más jóvenes” como socios; que cultivaran deliberadamente líderes indígenas que pudieran tomar su lugar en la mesa de la misión. Las iglesias misioneras fundadas por la EUB a menudo también fueron alentadas a unir fuerzas ecuménicamente con otras denominaciones protestantes, como en el caso de las iglesias unidas en Filipinas y la República Dominicana.
Cuando me convertí en Secretario General de Ministerios Globales a principios de 2010, me emocionó encontrar varios colegas del personal que valoraban las mesas redondas y, de hecho, encontrar algunas que ya estaban en marcha. Una, que data de 2007, estaba en Argentina y se reunía cada dos años. Los participantes en ese momento eran la Iglesia Metodista Evangélica de Argentina, la Iglesia Unida de Canadá, Ministerios Globales, la Iglesia Metodista Británica, la Iglesia Metodista Unida de Francia y Suiza, y el Consejo de Iglesias Metodistas Evangélicas de América Latina y el Caribe (CIEMAL). El objetivo no era controlar la misión metodista en Argentina, sino compartir, coordinar y multiplicar resultados positivos.
Los socios en las mesas redondas son claros al expresar sus propios intereses especiales, expectativas y capacidad financiera. En el caso de las iglesias misioneras nacionales o geográficamente definidas, esto significa establecer necesidades realistas, que los socios pueden abordar de manera colectiva o individual. Una anécdota de la Mesa Redonda Argentina de 2010 muestra los aspectos generales y específicos del proceso:
“Una cuestión sobre la mesa se refería a la financiación. Es probable que las subvenciones en bloque a la Iglesia argentina, por parte de las iglesias canadiense y francesa / suiza se puedan reducir o eliminar. Otras preocupaciones apremiantes incluyen el creciente pluralismo dentro de las iglesias, ministerios con estudiantes universitarios, entrenamiento del clero en estudios wesleyanos (...) Los metodistas en la Patagonia están preocupados por la seguridad de la minería, que causó gran interés entre los canadienses. Se llegó a un consenso sobre nuevas propuestas de financiación a través de The Advance (El Avance), el canal de misiones de segunda milla de Ministerios Globales. Uno de esos proyectos es la congregación de Cristo Rey en el lado norte de Buenos Aires. Otros nuevos comienzos de iglesias se encuentran en las provincias de Jujuy y San Louis”.[1]
Tomando impulso
Han seguido decenas de mesas redondas, con un enfoque en el cuatrienio 2013-2016, en conferencias centrales en África e iglesias metodistas autónomas en América Latina y el Caribe. Las mesas redondas centradas en lugares o temas asiáticos fueron frecuentes en el cuadrienio 2017-2020, y una en 2018 resultó en planes para una mayor colaboración misionera pan-metodista en la región.
Como se informó a la Conferencia General de 2016, el valor del proceso se ilustra con referencia en las mesas redondas en Malawi en 2013 y en los eventos de Costa de Marfil en el año de 2015. Las actas de esos eventos identifican a los participantes y sus afiliaciones. Esto incluye metodistas de base, misioneros, personal de agencias, socios ecuménicos y representantes de conferencias e instituciones anuales, todos comprometidos como socios. “Luego, las minutas detallan las metas acordadas, los desafíos y las respuestas consideradas, y los objetivos de los próximos pasos a seguir, incluidos los compromisos específicos. En muchos casos, las mesas redondas resultan en memorandos formales de entendimiento relacionados con objetivos específicos de la misión. La mesa redonda en Malawi y otra en Eurasia estaban preocupadas en parte por el movimiento y estado de la "iniciativa misionera", para una mayor participación en la estructura de la conferencia de la iglesia".[2]
Los temas de la mesa redonda a lo largo de los años se han expandido para incluir las cuatro áreas de enfoque de la iglesia: desarrollo de nuevos líderes, desarrollo congregacional, salud global y ministerio con los pobres. Estos temas son útiles en las mesas redondas de base amplia o en lugares de misiones particulares.
Empoderamiento
El proceso de la Mesa Redonda para la Misión es el reemplazo apropiado para el antiguo modelo bilateral de estructura y operación de la misión cristiana, aunque una modificación de ese estilo ha ganado algunos seguidores. Esto reemplazaría las juntas de misiones tradicionales con vínculos directos entre las conferencias y congregaciones estadounidenses y las unidades y programas de misiones en el extranjero. Si bien esto podría sugerir una participación más directa en la misión, dejaría en su lugar el mismo sistema de poder centrado en EE.UU. Así como la estructura de dependencia económica asociada con la era colonialista. También invita a la confusión en el establecimiento de la misión e invita a la competencia entre los "partidarios". Una estructura de misión multinacional y conexional es necesaria en una denominación diversa.
El enfoque de la mesa redonda empodera a todos los socios. Es más que un instrumento de misión: es más que “ayudar” solamente a nuevas comunidades cristianas. Las Mesas Redondas para la Misión incluyen componentes teológicos y de política que llegan al corazón de lo que significa seguir a Jesucristo y lo que significa ser su iglesia. Y empodera a los socios a través de un sentido de participación inclusiva.
Las Mesas Redondas para la Misión responden a la necesidad de una asociación misionera, de colaboración, con un sentido de mutualidad. La Conferencia Mundial de Misiones de 1947 en Whitby, Ontario, Canadá, tuvo especial importancia en sentar las bases para una nueva comprensión de la colaboración y la planificación de la misión representada por las Mesas Redondas para la Misión.
El lento compromiso Metodista Norteamericano
Las iglesias más antiguas que enviaban misioneros respondieron con diversos grados de entusiasmo y comprensión al mensaje de Whitby. Si bien, el Metodismo estadounidense estuvo bien representado en la conferencia, fue poco afectado por el concepto o la posibilidad práctica de una asociación misionera. Whitby no despertó un sentido de reciprocidad en la misión, entre la Junta de Misiones Metodistas y sus entidades extranjeras fundadas en la misión, agrupadas principalmente en "conferencias centrales" en África, Europa y América Latina.
De hecho, la Iglesia Metodista, formada en 1939, prestó relativamente, poca atención formal a sus componentes en el extranjero hasta la década de 1960. Aunque en 1948 se lanzó un proceso de estudio de estructuras fuera de los Estados Unidos: la Comisión de Estudio del Metodismo en el Extranjero (COSMOS). Después de permanecer durante años en modo de estudio, la Conferencia General de 1964 le pidió a COSMOS que presentara recomendaciones, sobre el futuro de las relaciones con sus iglesias más jóvenes en la próxima Conferencia General. La comisión hizo caso al mandato, pero sus recomendaciones se perdieron en la fusión Metodista-Evangélica con los Hermanos Unidos (EUB, en adelante) de 1968 y COSMOS pasó a la historia, en silencio, en el año de 1972. De allí surgieron muchas Iglesias Metodistas autónomas, en su mayoría nacionales, rediseñadas a partir de conferencias centrales en América Latina y Asia, y las conferencias centrales actuales en África, Europa y Filipinas. Las Conferencias Centrales, las Iglesias Metodistas autónomas y varias Iglesias Unidas forman una reserva más grande de socios misioneros para los Ministerios Globales.
Si los metodistas de América del Norte tardaron en llegar a la misión como asociación, incluso fueron más lentos en adoptar a las mesas redondas como medio de trabajo para la estrategia de la misión, como sucesoras del viejo modelo bilateral, descendente, de arriba hacia abajo. Como director de la Junta General de Ministerios Globales a fines de la década de 1990 y principios de la década de 2000, intenté con poco éxito avanzar en el enfoque de las mesas redondas.
Cuando regresé a Alemania después de ocho años en Brasil, había trabajado en entornos colaborativos; primero ecuménicamente y luego como secretario de misión de la Conferencia Central de Alemania. Nuestra oficina de la misión Metodista Unida Alemana tenía amplios vínculos con socios de misiones globales. Esta apertura a la mutualidad fue el resultado de los antecedentes de la Conferencia Central de Alemania, que surgió (como lo hizo) desde el lado de la EUB y su fusión en 1968. La denominación EUB, relativamente pequeña, estaba más inclinada a que la Iglesia Metodista “más grande” tratara a sus descendientes “más jóvenes” como socios; que cultivaran deliberadamente líderes indígenas que pudieran tomar su lugar en la mesa de la misión. Las iglesias misioneras fundadas por la EUB a menudo también fueron alentadas a unir fuerzas ecuménicamente con otras denominaciones protestantes, como en el caso de las iglesias unidas en Filipinas y la República Dominicana.
Cuando me convertí en Secretario General de Ministerios Globales a principios de 2010, me emocionó encontrar varios colegas del personal que valoraban las mesas redondas y, de hecho, encontrar algunas que ya estaban en marcha. Una, que data de 2007, estaba en Argentina y se reunía cada dos años. Los participantes en ese momento eran la Iglesia Metodista Evangélica de Argentina, la Iglesia Unida de Canadá, Ministerios Globales, la Iglesia Metodista Británica, la Iglesia Metodista Unida de Francia y Suiza, y el Consejo de Iglesias Metodistas Evangélicas de América Latina y el Caribe (CIEMAL). El objetivo no era controlar la misión metodista en Argentina, sino compartir, coordinar y multiplicar resultados positivos.
Los socios en las mesas redondas son claros al expresar sus propios intereses especiales, expectativas y capacidad financiera. En el caso de las iglesias misioneras nacionales o geográficamente definidas, esto significa establecer necesidades realistas, que los socios pueden abordar de manera colectiva o individual. Una anécdota de la Mesa Redonda Argentina de 2010 muestra los aspectos generales y específicos del proceso:
“Una cuestión sobre la mesa se refería a la financiación. Es probable que las subvenciones en bloque a la Iglesia argentina, por parte de las iglesias canadiense y francesa / suiza se puedan reducir o eliminar. Otras preocupaciones apremiantes incluyen el creciente pluralismo dentro de las iglesias, ministerios con estudiantes universitarios, entrenamiento del clero en estudios wesleyanos (...) Los metodistas en la Patagonia están preocupados por la seguridad de la minería, que causó gran interés entre los canadienses. Se llegó a un consenso sobre nuevas propuestas de financiación a través de The Advance (El Avance), el canal de misiones de segunda milla de Ministerios Globales. Uno de esos proyectos es la congregación de Cristo Rey en el lado norte de Buenos Aires. Otros nuevos comienzos de iglesias se encuentran en las provincias de Jujuy y San Louis”.[1]
Tomando impulso
Han seguido decenas de mesas redondas, con un enfoque en el cuatrienio 2013-2016, en conferencias centrales en África e iglesias metodistas autónomas en América Latina y el Caribe. Las mesas redondas centradas en lugares o temas asiáticos fueron frecuentes en el cuadrienio 2017-2020, y una en 2018 resultó en planes para una mayor colaboración misionera pan-metodista en la región.
Como se informó a la Conferencia General de 2016, el valor del proceso se ilustra con referencia en las mesas redondas en Malawi en 2013 y en los eventos de Costa de Marfil en el año de 2015. Las actas de esos eventos identifican a los participantes y sus afiliaciones. Esto incluye metodistas de base, misioneros, personal de agencias, socios ecuménicos y representantes de conferencias e instituciones anuales, todos comprometidos como socios. “Luego, las minutas detallan las metas acordadas, los desafíos y las respuestas consideradas, y los objetivos de los próximos pasos a seguir, incluidos los compromisos específicos. En muchos casos, las mesas redondas resultan en memorandos formales de entendimiento relacionados con objetivos específicos de la misión. La mesa redonda en Malawi y otra en Eurasia estaban preocupadas en parte por el movimiento y estado de la "iniciativa misionera", para una mayor participación en la estructura de la conferencia de la iglesia".[2]
Los temas de la mesa redonda a lo largo de los años se han expandido para incluir las cuatro áreas de enfoque de la iglesia: desarrollo de nuevos líderes, desarrollo congregacional, salud global y ministerio con los pobres. Estos temas son útiles en las mesas redondas de base amplia o en lugares de misiones particulares.
Empoderamiento
El proceso de la Mesa Redonda para la Misión es el reemplazo apropiado para el antiguo modelo bilateral de estructura y operación de la misión cristiana, aunque una modificación de ese estilo ha ganado algunos seguidores. Esto reemplazaría las juntas de misiones tradicionales con vínculos directos entre las conferencias y congregaciones estadounidenses y las unidades y programas de misiones en el extranjero. Si bien esto podría sugerir una participación más directa en la misión, dejaría en su lugar el mismo sistema de poder centrado en EE.UU. Así como la estructura de dependencia económica asociada con la era colonialista. También invita a la confusión en el establecimiento de la misión e invita a la competencia entre los "partidarios". Una estructura de misión multinacional y conexional es necesaria en una denominación diversa.
El enfoque de la mesa redonda empodera a todos los socios. Es más que un instrumento de misión: es más que “ayudar” solamente a nuevas comunidades cristianas. Las Mesas Redondas para la Misión incluyen componentes teológicos y de política que llegan al corazón de lo que significa seguir a Jesucristo y lo que significa ser su iglesia. Y empodera a los socios a través de un sentido de participación inclusiva.
Wednesday, July 15, 2020
Thomas Kemper: Mesas Redondas para la Visión y Práctica Misionera Metodista Unida, Parte I
La publicación de blog de hoy está escrita por Thomas Kemper y traducida por Pedro Zavala Chaparro. El Sr. Thomas Kemper actualmente se desempeña como Secretario General de la Junta General de Ministerios Globales de la Iglesia Metodista Unida (GBGM). Esta es la primera de dos partes.
“Las Mesas Redondas para la Misión representan un proceso consultivo para reunir una red de socios comprometidos, en expresiones particulares de la misión de Dios. Pueden centrarse en un área geográfica específica, en un tema o en un proyecto".[1]
Las Mesas Redondas para la Misión son cada vez más valiosas y su realización cada vez más frecuente, en la visión y práctica misioneras de la Iglesia Metodista Unida y su Junta General de Ministerios Globales. Las razones principales son obvias. Las Mesas Redondas para la Misión responden a la necesidad de una asociación misionera, de colaboración, con un sentido de mutualidad, en un mundo en el que las iglesias fundadas en la misión, especialmente en el Sur y Oriente Global, se ven a sí mismas como verdaderos socios y líderes en la misión global. En un panorama en el que la misión ecuménica es una posibilidad y también una necesidad.
El modelo es adaptable para la planificación y evaluación estratégica de la misión, que abarca desde la divulgación del servicio social local, hasta los principales ministerios nacionales o regionales. Considero importante mencionar, que las mesas redondas son herramientas esenciales para: el inicio de nuevos esfuerzos misioneros, la evaluación del momento en el que se encuentran, mirar la estabilidad de las iniciativas misioneras en maduración, así como en el diseño de futuras estrategias. Las mesas redondas también pueden ser valiosas para la colocación de misioneros. El valor radica en lo poderoso de las dinámicas positivas resultantes. Las mesas redondas se alejan del patrón bilateral tradicional de envío y recepción de misioneros, a una de relaciones multilaterales y responsabilidad compartida entre los participantes.
Compromiso personal y aprendizaje
Mi entusiasmo por la misión a partir de mesas redondas nació gracias a la combinación de experiencias personales y el estudio de la historia de la misión.
Mi esposa Bárbara y yo fuimos a Brasil como misioneros adultos jóvenes, no mucho después de graduarnos; enviados por la organización misionera de la Iglesia Metodista Unida en Alemania, nuestro país de origen. El pensamiento predominante de aquella época entendía a la misión como una exportación del norte y el oeste, realizado por misioneros europeos y norteamericanos. Algunas partes del trabajo, no todo, aún tenían una fuerte capa de colonialismo. El sistema de entrega generalmente involucraba una "Junta de Misión" en Nueva York, Londres o Frankfurt, con una planificación y una supervisión típica, que se desenvolvía de arriba hacia abajo.
Este patrón tradicional simplemente no funcionó en São Paulo, donde nos asignaron. No se tuvo en cuenta las aspiraciones y talentos de la población local, así como las realidades competitivas de las comunidades multirreligiosas ahí presentes. Nos encontramos sentados para sesiones de estrategia de misión con metodistas brasileños, hermanas católicas romanas, predicadores pentecostales, comerciantes, funcionarios gubernamentales y gente de la calle. A menudo, la atención estaba en lo que podríamos hacer colectivamente para abordar las realidades de la pobreza y la injusticia, en una de las ciudades más grandes del mundo. Un recuerdo duradero proviene del sentido de participación activa en toda nuestra mesa, que a veces se convertía en una olla hirviendo, gracias a lo que cada uno contribuía. Todos estaban comprometidos a pesar de las diferentes capacidades económicas y las complejidades organizativas de las agencias misioneras.
No me malinterpreten. Necesitábamos la participación y el apoyo de las juntas de misiones en Frankfurt, Londres y Nueva York, pero como socios, en vez de ser solamente supervisores.
En São Paulo experimenté la dinámica de lo que ahora llamamos "misión desde los márgenes".[2] La anterior, frase maravillosa agregada a nuestro vocabulario en el año de 2013 por la Comisión de Misión Mundial y Evangelización (CWME) del Consejo Mundial de Iglesias, una unidad ecuménica. El trabajo anterior me ayudó a comprender la necesidad de las asociaciones misioneras y de las mesas redondas para el trabajo de misiones.
La comisión, originalmente el Consejo Misionero Internacional, surgió de la primera Conferencia Misionera Mundial celebrada en Edimburgo, Escocia, en 1910. A esa reunión histórica asistieron principalmente protestantes, varones, blancos de Europa y América del Norte. En ella se reflejaba la creencia de que todo el mundo podría ser convertido a Cristo, en una generación con suficientes jóvenes misioneros. Pero las posteriores conferencias de misión mundial de CWME se volvieron sustancialmente más diversas en sus composicones geográfica, raciales y de género, y considerablemente más realistas en expectativas. La conferencia CWME 2018 en Arusha, Tanzania, celebró el fuerte testimonio de la misión de las iglesias africanas sobre el tema "Llamados a transformar el discipulado".
Por otra parte, la Conferencia Mundial de Misiones de 1947 en Whitby, Ontario, Canadá, tuvo especial importancia en sentar las bases para una nueva comprensión de la colaboración y la planificación de la misión representada por las Mesas Redondas para la Misión. Siempre me ha entusiasmado leer los documentos y las actas de Whitby, que considero como el punto de partida para el concepto de asociaciones misioneras y la práctica de convocar mesas redondas.
Socios en la Misión y la obediencia a Dios
Whitby fue la primera Conferencia Misionera Mundial celebrada después del final de la Segunda Guerra Mundial, y a la vez no fue una de las reuniones más conocidas. No obstante, considero que es una de las más importantes, especialmente en términos de relaciones entre lo que en 1947 se llamaría "iglesias más antiguas" e iglesias "más jóvenes". Así como en términos de la promoción de la mutualidad en la misión, como se aprecia en las Mesas Redondas para la Misión. El tema era "El testigo cristiano en un mundo revolucionario". El anterior, reflejo de los tiempos, a medida que se redibujaba el mapa colonial, incluso mundial. La declaración final de la conferencia se intituló, "Nuestra lealtad suprema: la 'supernacionalidad' de la misión". El anteior no es para soprendernos, dado el comportamiento de las naciones supuestamente "cristianas", durante las dos guerras mundiales recientes. Así como el desarrollo del Holocausto que surgió en la tierra de Martín Lutero y la Reforma Protestante. La historia para contar a las naciones no era la misma en 1947 que en el Edimburgo de 1910.
En Whitby, los delegados de las iglesias más antiguas y más jóvenes pasaron tiempo reuniéndose por separado, para evaluar situaciones de posguerra y así explorar las diversas aspiraciones. Cuando se compararon dos listas de inquietudes se percataron que tenían una gran similitud, y más de un documento conjunto fue el resultado de esas sesiones de trabajo y escucha. El título del documento era "Asociación de las Iglesias más jóvenes y mayores en obediencia a la Comisión de nuestro Señor". Este fue uno de los primeros avales del concepto de asociaciones misioneras, concebido como igualdad, respeto mutuo y en obediencia a Dios. El documento final de Whitby es extraordinario para su tiempo, o incluso para cualquier otro, que trata tanto de la política, como de la práctica en las relaciones entre iglesias más jóvenes y más viejas en una familia de fe.
Además, el documento reconoció que algunas iglesias jóvenes habían "alcanzado una etapa avanzada de desarrollo". También expresó la esperanza de que esas iglesias "eliminaran de una vez por todas, el sentido de dependencia hacia las iglesias más antiguas. Y de igual modo a mantenerse firmes, en la verdadera base de la igualdad espiritual absoluta y de su derecho a administrar sus propios asuntos, a enmarcar sus propias políticas, bajo la guía de Dios, el Espíritu Santo. También a dar su propio testimonio distintivo en el mundo, como el instrumento por el cual Dios quiere llevar a Cristo a toda la población de las tierras en que habitan".[3]
“Las Mesas Redondas para la Misión representan un proceso consultivo para reunir una red de socios comprometidos, en expresiones particulares de la misión de Dios. Pueden centrarse en un área geográfica específica, en un tema o en un proyecto".[1]
Las Mesas Redondas para la Misión son cada vez más valiosas y su realización cada vez más frecuente, en la visión y práctica misioneras de la Iglesia Metodista Unida y su Junta General de Ministerios Globales. Las razones principales son obvias. Las Mesas Redondas para la Misión responden a la necesidad de una asociación misionera, de colaboración, con un sentido de mutualidad, en un mundo en el que las iglesias fundadas en la misión, especialmente en el Sur y Oriente Global, se ven a sí mismas como verdaderos socios y líderes en la misión global. En un panorama en el que la misión ecuménica es una posibilidad y también una necesidad.
El modelo es adaptable para la planificación y evaluación estratégica de la misión, que abarca desde la divulgación del servicio social local, hasta los principales ministerios nacionales o regionales. Considero importante mencionar, que las mesas redondas son herramientas esenciales para: el inicio de nuevos esfuerzos misioneros, la evaluación del momento en el que se encuentran, mirar la estabilidad de las iniciativas misioneras en maduración, así como en el diseño de futuras estrategias. Las mesas redondas también pueden ser valiosas para la colocación de misioneros. El valor radica en lo poderoso de las dinámicas positivas resultantes. Las mesas redondas se alejan del patrón bilateral tradicional de envío y recepción de misioneros, a una de relaciones multilaterales y responsabilidad compartida entre los participantes.
Compromiso personal y aprendizaje
Mi entusiasmo por la misión a partir de mesas redondas nació gracias a la combinación de experiencias personales y el estudio de la historia de la misión.
Mi esposa Bárbara y yo fuimos a Brasil como misioneros adultos jóvenes, no mucho después de graduarnos; enviados por la organización misionera de la Iglesia Metodista Unida en Alemania, nuestro país de origen. El pensamiento predominante de aquella época entendía a la misión como una exportación del norte y el oeste, realizado por misioneros europeos y norteamericanos. Algunas partes del trabajo, no todo, aún tenían una fuerte capa de colonialismo. El sistema de entrega generalmente involucraba una "Junta de Misión" en Nueva York, Londres o Frankfurt, con una planificación y una supervisión típica, que se desenvolvía de arriba hacia abajo.
Este patrón tradicional simplemente no funcionó en São Paulo, donde nos asignaron. No se tuvo en cuenta las aspiraciones y talentos de la población local, así como las realidades competitivas de las comunidades multirreligiosas ahí presentes. Nos encontramos sentados para sesiones de estrategia de misión con metodistas brasileños, hermanas católicas romanas, predicadores pentecostales, comerciantes, funcionarios gubernamentales y gente de la calle. A menudo, la atención estaba en lo que podríamos hacer colectivamente para abordar las realidades de la pobreza y la injusticia, en una de las ciudades más grandes del mundo. Un recuerdo duradero proviene del sentido de participación activa en toda nuestra mesa, que a veces se convertía en una olla hirviendo, gracias a lo que cada uno contribuía. Todos estaban comprometidos a pesar de las diferentes capacidades económicas y las complejidades organizativas de las agencias misioneras.
No me malinterpreten. Necesitábamos la participación y el apoyo de las juntas de misiones en Frankfurt, Londres y Nueva York, pero como socios, en vez de ser solamente supervisores.
En São Paulo experimenté la dinámica de lo que ahora llamamos "misión desde los márgenes".[2] La anterior, frase maravillosa agregada a nuestro vocabulario en el año de 2013 por la Comisión de Misión Mundial y Evangelización (CWME) del Consejo Mundial de Iglesias, una unidad ecuménica. El trabajo anterior me ayudó a comprender la necesidad de las asociaciones misioneras y de las mesas redondas para el trabajo de misiones.
La comisión, originalmente el Consejo Misionero Internacional, surgió de la primera Conferencia Misionera Mundial celebrada en Edimburgo, Escocia, en 1910. A esa reunión histórica asistieron principalmente protestantes, varones, blancos de Europa y América del Norte. En ella se reflejaba la creencia de que todo el mundo podría ser convertido a Cristo, en una generación con suficientes jóvenes misioneros. Pero las posteriores conferencias de misión mundial de CWME se volvieron sustancialmente más diversas en sus composicones geográfica, raciales y de género, y considerablemente más realistas en expectativas. La conferencia CWME 2018 en Arusha, Tanzania, celebró el fuerte testimonio de la misión de las iglesias africanas sobre el tema "Llamados a transformar el discipulado".
Por otra parte, la Conferencia Mundial de Misiones de 1947 en Whitby, Ontario, Canadá, tuvo especial importancia en sentar las bases para una nueva comprensión de la colaboración y la planificación de la misión representada por las Mesas Redondas para la Misión. Siempre me ha entusiasmado leer los documentos y las actas de Whitby, que considero como el punto de partida para el concepto de asociaciones misioneras y la práctica de convocar mesas redondas.
Socios en la Misión y la obediencia a Dios
Whitby fue la primera Conferencia Misionera Mundial celebrada después del final de la Segunda Guerra Mundial, y a la vez no fue una de las reuniones más conocidas. No obstante, considero que es una de las más importantes, especialmente en términos de relaciones entre lo que en 1947 se llamaría "iglesias más antiguas" e iglesias "más jóvenes". Así como en términos de la promoción de la mutualidad en la misión, como se aprecia en las Mesas Redondas para la Misión. El tema era "El testigo cristiano en un mundo revolucionario". El anterior, reflejo de los tiempos, a medida que se redibujaba el mapa colonial, incluso mundial. La declaración final de la conferencia se intituló, "Nuestra lealtad suprema: la 'supernacionalidad' de la misión". El anteior no es para soprendernos, dado el comportamiento de las naciones supuestamente "cristianas", durante las dos guerras mundiales recientes. Así como el desarrollo del Holocausto que surgió en la tierra de Martín Lutero y la Reforma Protestante. La historia para contar a las naciones no era la misma en 1947 que en el Edimburgo de 1910.
En Whitby, los delegados de las iglesias más antiguas y más jóvenes pasaron tiempo reuniéndose por separado, para evaluar situaciones de posguerra y así explorar las diversas aspiraciones. Cuando se compararon dos listas de inquietudes se percataron que tenían una gran similitud, y más de un documento conjunto fue el resultado de esas sesiones de trabajo y escucha. El título del documento era "Asociación de las Iglesias más jóvenes y mayores en obediencia a la Comisión de nuestro Señor". Este fue uno de los primeros avales del concepto de asociaciones misioneras, concebido como igualdad, respeto mutuo y en obediencia a Dios. El documento final de Whitby es extraordinario para su tiempo, o incluso para cualquier otro, que trata tanto de la política, como de la práctica en las relaciones entre iglesias más jóvenes y más viejas en una familia de fe.
Además, el documento reconoció que algunas iglesias jóvenes habían "alcanzado una etapa avanzada de desarrollo". También expresó la esperanza de que esas iglesias "eliminaran de una vez por todas, el sentido de dependencia hacia las iglesias más antiguas. Y de igual modo a mantenerse firmes, en la verdadera base de la igualdad espiritual absoluta y de su derecho a administrar sus propios asuntos, a enmarcar sus propias políticas, bajo la guía de Dios, el Espíritu Santo. También a dar su propio testimonio distintivo en el mundo, como el instrumento por el cual Dios quiere llevar a Cristo a toda la población de las tierras en que habitan".[3]
[1] Informe de la Junta General de Ministerios Globales, a la Conferencia General de 2016, Advance Daily Christin Advocate, vol. 2, p. 812.
[2] Comisión de Misión Mundial y Evangelización, "Juntos hacia la vida: Misión y evangelización en paisajes
cambiantes", septiembre de 2012, págs. 14 y siguientes. En línea en https:/ www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/commissions/mission-and-evangelism/together-into-life-mission-and-evangelism-in-Changing-landscapes.
[3] C.W. Ranson, ed. Renovación y avance: testimonio cristiano en un mundo revolucionario. Londres: Edinburg House, 1948, p. 175.
Wednesday, May 13, 2020
Recommended Viewing: Thomas Kemper Hosts Global Mission During a Pandemic Interviews
Thomas Kemper, General Secretary of Global Ministries, has been conducting short (4-7 min.) video interviews with missionaries and mission partners around the world to ask them about their experiences in the middle of the coronavirus pandemic. These interviews are interesting for several reasons: They show the variety of responses to and concerns about the pandemic in different countries and regions, but they also show the variety of types of mission work, missionaries, and mission leaders that characterize global United Methodist mission. The series currently stands at 17 videos, but more will continue to be added. The following is a list of the videos as of the time of this post.
Entire series (link will include additional videos added later)
Andrea Riley, UMW Regional Missionary for Latin America (posted 5/12/2020)
Revs. Alma and Richard Navarro, Global Ministries missionaries from the Philippines serving Overseas Filipino Workers in Taiwan (posted 5/4/2020)
Nyamah Dunbar, Global Ministries West Africa Area Liaison, serving in Liberia (posted 5/1/2020)
Aldrin Salvador, Deputy Director of the Manila Episcopal Area Disaster Management Office, UMCOR (posted 4/29/2020)
Dr. Issa Tarazi, Executive Director of Near East Council of Churches Department of Service to the Palestine Refugees in Gaza (posted 4/27/2020)
Dr. Godfrey Ogbu, Chief Medical Officer of Jalingo United Methodist Hospital and Health Board Coordinator in Nigeria (posted 4/24/2020)
Debbie and Dr. Lester Dornon, Global Ministries missionaries from the United States serving at Tansen Hospital in Nepal (posted 4/22/2020)
Dr. Belinda Forbes, a Global Ministries missionary from the United States serving with Acción Médica Cristiana in Nicaragua (posted 4/20/2020)
Rev. Andrew Soon Lee, a Global Ministries missionary from the United States serving as country coordinator in Cambodia (posted 4/15/2020)
Sarah Walker, Global Ministries Global Mission Fellow from the United States serving with the Free Methodist Church of Spain (posted 4/13/2020)
Bishop Thomas J. Bickerton of the New York Annual Conference (posted 4/10/2020)
Hangoul Choi, Global Ministries Global Mission Fellow from South Korea serving as Refugee Work Manager with the Free Methodist Church of Greece (posted 4/8/2020)
Dr. Glenn Paraso, Executive Director/CEO of Mary Johnston hospital in The Philippines (posted 4/6/2020)
Bishop John K. Yambasu of the Sierra Leone Episcopal Area (posted 4/3/2020)
Thomas Kemper, General Secretary of Global Ministries (posted 4/1/2020)
Friday, April 12, 2019
Thomas Kemper: Continuities in mission - A reflection on the bicentennial of Methodist mission
Today's piece is by Thomas Kemper, General Secretary of Global Ministries. It continues UM & Global's celebration of the bicentennial of United Methodist missions. This piece originally appeared on Global Ministries' website.
How does the current work of the United Methodist General Board of Global Ministries compare to the objectives of our oldest predecessor, the Methodist Episcopal Missionary Society, established in 1819? I have reflected on this question as we celebrate our mission bicentennial and I am fascinated by the continuities I see.
Nathan Bangs, the first executive of the missionary society and a historian of early American Methodism, cites six motivations for starting the organization. Two concerned financial considerations and one is sociological—keeping up with what other denominations were doing. The other three, focusing on mission outreach, are the ones I find most interesting. These are: 1) reaching people on the remote western frontier of the young United States; 2) ministry with Native Americans; and 3) extension of mission “to more distant fields” [abroad]. In short, the Missionary Society was intended to enlarge the reach of the gospel to persons and groups not already or well-served by the church, to offer them Christ and accompany them on their faith journeys. This mission outreach is what we still do.
Ministry with indigenous peoples
I am a little amazed that a self-conscious motive for the society’s founding was the possibility of including Native Americans in the Methodist family. This came about primarily through the ministry of a lay pastor named John Stewart, of mixed African-American and white heritage. He preached among the Wyandot people in Ohio beginning around 1815 with the support of the then Ohio Annual Conference and the benevolence of Bishop William McKendree, the third U.S. episcopal leader after Thomas Coke and Francis Asbury. Stories of the work of Stewart enlivened enthusiasm for a missionary society back East.
While Methodists may not have an altogether continuous, or admirable, history of relations with indigenous peoples, such ministry is in our DNA and has been pulled to the forefront in recent years by the UMC Act of Repentance Movement. We must never again let it fall by the wayside.
In the early 1830s, the Missionary Society wet its sights on “distant fields” abroad, first Liberia, Brazil, and then Argentina. This has grown remarkably over the decades, so that today we have missionaries in some 60 countries and mission personnel, projects, and partners in a total of more than 125 countries. And we keep adding new locales. Recent mission initiatives have introduced Methodism to 15 places where it did not formerly exist, and since 2009, these initiatives have started more than 1,000 new worshipping communities.
Ministry with Immigrants
The initial mission society operational plan provided circuit-riding missionary-pastors on the frontier. Bishops serving mission districts called upon the society for funds for such clergy. Immigrants counted in this expansion and our denomination’s contemporary concern for migrants emerges from our mission roots.
The several missionary societies that would emerge in our American Methodist and Evangelical United Brethren history were acutely aware of the influx of immigrants in the mid-to-late 19th century. The M.E. Church Missionary Society organized specific mission outreach to ethnic or nationality groups—such as Norwegians, Germans, Swedes and Italians—who had their own cultures but were on the fringes of life in the New World on arrival.
Ministry with 19th century immigrants by our EUB mission ancestors has personal meaning for me. Immigrants from Germany who settled in the United States joined a predecessor movement that became part of our Evangelical United Brethren (EUB) heritage. Some of these new Wesleyans returned as missionaries to Germany, where they formed the community out of which my family would eventually become United Methodist. So, I have a keen appreciation for the ministry with migrants and those on the edges, giving substance to the realization that migration can be a blessing.
Also, as early as 1850, German Methodists in Bremerhaven, the port city of Bremen, started an Auswanderer Kirche, or “Emigration Church,” to prepare people leaving Germany to link up with Methodists (rather than Lutherans or Catholics) in the new land. They distributed a 24-page pamphlet, “friendly hints (advice) for emigrants,” and they “have done much more than us,” wrote one Lutheran critic at the time.
Ministry with impoverished communities
Christian mission is always at its best when it focuses on those ignored or pushed aside by dominant cultural norms and economic force. We learn this from Jesus and John Wesley, and my own experience as a missionary in Brazil bears it out. I went to Brazil in 1986, where I worked for eight years teaching in a theological seminary. The interaction with students was deeply meaningful and valuable to my growth as a Christian. But the most gripping part of my experience was through an ecumenical ministry with people who were homeless, many living under the freeways of São Paulo.
The street ministry focused on food and worship. Weekly, people living on the streets and our group of volunteers contributed to a common soup pot—vegetables about to be discarded by vendors or bits of fish from shop owners. Everyone contributed to “The Soup” and shared the savory results. Everyone was equal around the common dish. After eating, we sang hymns, praised God, and prayed together. Sometimes we joined marches and protests seeking justice. It was powerful mission.
Two hundred years ago, April 5, 1819, a group of Methodists met at the Forsyth Street Church in New York City to organize a missionary society. They did so, issuing an “address,” very much in the language of its day but with a breadth of vision worth recalling:
"Our views are not restricted to our own nation or colour; we hope the aborigines of our country, the Spaniards of South America, the French of Louisiana and Canada, and every other people who are destitute of the invaluable blessings of the Gospel, as far as our means may admit, will be comprehended in the field of the labours of our zealous missionaries."
Amen.
How does the current work of the United Methodist General Board of Global Ministries compare to the objectives of our oldest predecessor, the Methodist Episcopal Missionary Society, established in 1819? I have reflected on this question as we celebrate our mission bicentennial and I am fascinated by the continuities I see.
Nathan Bangs, the first executive of the missionary society and a historian of early American Methodism, cites six motivations for starting the organization. Two concerned financial considerations and one is sociological—keeping up with what other denominations were doing. The other three, focusing on mission outreach, are the ones I find most interesting. These are: 1) reaching people on the remote western frontier of the young United States; 2) ministry with Native Americans; and 3) extension of mission “to more distant fields” [abroad]. In short, the Missionary Society was intended to enlarge the reach of the gospel to persons and groups not already or well-served by the church, to offer them Christ and accompany them on their faith journeys. This mission outreach is what we still do.
Ministry with indigenous peoples
I am a little amazed that a self-conscious motive for the society’s founding was the possibility of including Native Americans in the Methodist family. This came about primarily through the ministry of a lay pastor named John Stewart, of mixed African-American and white heritage. He preached among the Wyandot people in Ohio beginning around 1815 with the support of the then Ohio Annual Conference and the benevolence of Bishop William McKendree, the third U.S. episcopal leader after Thomas Coke and Francis Asbury. Stories of the work of Stewart enlivened enthusiasm for a missionary society back East.
While Methodists may not have an altogether continuous, or admirable, history of relations with indigenous peoples, such ministry is in our DNA and has been pulled to the forefront in recent years by the UMC Act of Repentance Movement. We must never again let it fall by the wayside.
In the early 1830s, the Missionary Society wet its sights on “distant fields” abroad, first Liberia, Brazil, and then Argentina. This has grown remarkably over the decades, so that today we have missionaries in some 60 countries and mission personnel, projects, and partners in a total of more than 125 countries. And we keep adding new locales. Recent mission initiatives have introduced Methodism to 15 places where it did not formerly exist, and since 2009, these initiatives have started more than 1,000 new worshipping communities.
Ministry with Immigrants
The initial mission society operational plan provided circuit-riding missionary-pastors on the frontier. Bishops serving mission districts called upon the society for funds for such clergy. Immigrants counted in this expansion and our denomination’s contemporary concern for migrants emerges from our mission roots.
The several missionary societies that would emerge in our American Methodist and Evangelical United Brethren history were acutely aware of the influx of immigrants in the mid-to-late 19th century. The M.E. Church Missionary Society organized specific mission outreach to ethnic or nationality groups—such as Norwegians, Germans, Swedes and Italians—who had their own cultures but were on the fringes of life in the New World on arrival.
Ministry with 19th century immigrants by our EUB mission ancestors has personal meaning for me. Immigrants from Germany who settled in the United States joined a predecessor movement that became part of our Evangelical United Brethren (EUB) heritage. Some of these new Wesleyans returned as missionaries to Germany, where they formed the community out of which my family would eventually become United Methodist. So, I have a keen appreciation for the ministry with migrants and those on the edges, giving substance to the realization that migration can be a blessing.
Also, as early as 1850, German Methodists in Bremerhaven, the port city of Bremen, started an Auswanderer Kirche, or “Emigration Church,” to prepare people leaving Germany to link up with Methodists (rather than Lutherans or Catholics) in the new land. They distributed a 24-page pamphlet, “friendly hints (advice) for emigrants,” and they “have done much more than us,” wrote one Lutheran critic at the time.
Ministry with impoverished communities
Christian mission is always at its best when it focuses on those ignored or pushed aside by dominant cultural norms and economic force. We learn this from Jesus and John Wesley, and my own experience as a missionary in Brazil bears it out. I went to Brazil in 1986, where I worked for eight years teaching in a theological seminary. The interaction with students was deeply meaningful and valuable to my growth as a Christian. But the most gripping part of my experience was through an ecumenical ministry with people who were homeless, many living under the freeways of São Paulo.
The street ministry focused on food and worship. Weekly, people living on the streets and our group of volunteers contributed to a common soup pot—vegetables about to be discarded by vendors or bits of fish from shop owners. Everyone contributed to “The Soup” and shared the savory results. Everyone was equal around the common dish. After eating, we sang hymns, praised God, and prayed together. Sometimes we joined marches and protests seeking justice. It was powerful mission.
Two hundred years ago, April 5, 1819, a group of Methodists met at the Forsyth Street Church in New York City to organize a missionary society. They did so, issuing an “address,” very much in the language of its day but with a breadth of vision worth recalling:
"Our views are not restricted to our own nation or colour; we hope the aborigines of our country, the Spaniards of South America, the French of Louisiana and Canada, and every other people who are destitute of the invaluable blessings of the Gospel, as far as our means may admit, will be comprehended in the field of the labours of our zealous missionaries."
Amen.
Tuesday, September 27, 2016
Recommended readings: Faith and migration
Migration has been an important topic du jour in missiology and in broader news and policy discussions. Often such discussions refer to the "migration crisis." While the harmful effects of forced migration especially should not be ignored but rather taken seriously by Christians and policy-makers alike, two recent articles make the argument that it is important to go beyond seeing migration as just a crisis or a problem to be solved.
In their recent New World Outlook article "The Development of Faith During Migration," Michael Nausner and Tsaurayi Kudakwashe Mapfeka seek to shift views of migration from the negative to the neutral. They write, "We, the authors of this article, believe that migration is not necessarily a crisis to fight but a basic living condition that has existed since humans first populated this planet." Moreover, this "basic living condition" has special significant for Christians. A careful reading of the Bible, they assert, will yield "a migratory understanding of Christian identity."
In the same issue of New World Outlook, Thomas Kemper goes a step further by arguing that migration can be seen not just as a given fact of Christianity, but as a positive force in Christian history. Accordingly, he titles his article "Migration as Blessing." In it, he traces the important contributions migration has made to Christianity, especially in the realm of mission.
In their recent New World Outlook article "The Development of Faith During Migration," Michael Nausner and Tsaurayi Kudakwashe Mapfeka seek to shift views of migration from the negative to the neutral. They write, "We, the authors of this article, believe that migration is not necessarily a crisis to fight but a basic living condition that has existed since humans first populated this planet." Moreover, this "basic living condition" has special significant for Christians. A careful reading of the Bible, they assert, will yield "a migratory understanding of Christian identity."
In the same issue of New World Outlook, Thomas Kemper goes a step further by arguing that migration can be seen not just as a given fact of Christianity, but as a positive force in Christian history. Accordingly, he titles his article "Migration as Blessing." In it, he traces the important contributions migration has made to Christianity, especially in the realm of mission.
Thursday, November 5, 2015
Recommended reading: Thomas Kemper on Extending the Global Mission Conversation
General Secretary of GBGM Thomas Kemper, in this month's New World Outlook magazine, has published a piece about some of the new missiological directions in which his organization has been going. Kemper touches on three themes in particular: the structure of GBGM, which includes people from all over the world serving in many ways and places; the practice of mission roundtables that encourage mutuality and listening; and partnerships with autonomous Methodist churches and other ecumenical partners, especially in Latin America. The piece is well worth a read for those interested in the latest in United Methodist missiology.
Tuesday, August 4, 2015
Recommended Reading: Laudato si
If you haven't heard by now, Pope Francis released an encyclical about care for the environment which touches on, among other things, climate change. Did you know, though, that you can find the full text of the encyclical online from the Vatican? It's available here and well worth a read.
Once you've read that, if you'd like a United Methodist perspective on the pope's encyclical, Thomas Kemper, head of GBGM, has written one that's available here.
Once you've read that, if you'd like a United Methodist perspective on the pope's encyclical, Thomas Kemper, head of GBGM, has written one that's available here.
Thursday, May 21, 2015
Kemper, Friday reflect on Together Towards LIfe
This blog has attempted to provide specifically United Methodist reflections on Together Towards Life, the new mission document adopted by the World Council of Churches. I am pleased to share links to two more of these with you.
First, GBGM General Secretary Thomas Kemper, writing back in March, briefly introduces the document and suggests three questions for further study of it:
Second, Rev. Patrick Friday, director of the In Mission Together program for GBGM, also writing back in March, reflects on the theme of mission from the margin, which is an important emphasis of Together Towards Life. He holds up the 50/50 Partnerships promoted by the In Mission Together team as an example of the ways in which United Methodists can be in mission with, not in mission to, those on the margins.
First, GBGM General Secretary Thomas Kemper, writing back in March, briefly introduces the document and suggests three questions for further study of it:
- How do you celebrate the awareness that the gospel of Jesus Christ is “good news for all” in the contemporary, always changing, social and political landscape?
- In what areas might ecumenical mission collaboration be most productive: church planting, disaster relief and/or health ministries?
- How does mission awareness keep your church alive and on the move? How broad is your mission movement?
Second, Rev. Patrick Friday, director of the In Mission Together program for GBGM, also writing back in March, reflects on the theme of mission from the margin, which is an important emphasis of Together Towards Life. He holds up the 50/50 Partnerships promoted by the In Mission Together team as an example of the ways in which United Methodists can be in mission with, not in mission to, those on the margins.
Thursday, November 13, 2014
Thomas Kemper on Together towards Life
Last week, this blog began an examination of Together towards Life: Mission and Evangelism in Changing Landscapes, the new affirmation on mission and evangelism adopted by the World Council of Churches. While our examination of this document will be primarily focused on its use as a teaching tool, especially in United Methodist contexts, I thought it appropriate to refer readers to a theological assessment of the document by Thomas Kemper, general secretary of the General Board of Global Ministries.
Mr. Kemper's remarks originally appeared in the October 2014 edition of the International Bulletin of Missionary Research, but they can also be accessed on GBGM's webpage. In the piece, Kemper affirms and analyzes four themes from Together towards Life, "the concept of missio Dei, mission theology grounded in the Holy Spirit, “mission from the margins,” and the inclusion of health, healing, and wholeness". Kemper's piece is well worth a read for United Methodists interested in engaging with this document as a way to stimulate fresh thinking, reflecting, and learning about mission.
Mr. Kemper's remarks originally appeared in the October 2014 edition of the International Bulletin of Missionary Research, but they can also be accessed on GBGM's webpage. In the piece, Kemper affirms and analyzes four themes from Together towards Life, "the concept of missio Dei, mission theology grounded in the Holy Spirit, “mission from the margins,” and the inclusion of health, healing, and wholeness". Kemper's piece is well worth a read for United Methodists interested in engaging with this document as a way to stimulate fresh thinking, reflecting, and learning about mission.
Tuesday, November 11, 2014
Form vs. Function in the Worldwide Nature of the Church
Today's post is by UM & Global blogmaster Dr. David W. Scott, Assistant Professor of Religion and Pieper Chair of Servant Leadership at Ripon College.
Earlier this year, two great pieces about the worldwide nature of the United Methodist Church appeared on the Connectional Table's "About the Connection" blog. The first, from August, is written by Judi Kenaston, Chair of the Commission on General Conference. In it, she reflects on what has made her United Methodist before moving on to comment on the challenges of thinking about the UMC as a worldwide church. She concludes, "We may need to let go to create a new vision for the World Wide church." Among the things that United Methodists may need to let go of are "our U.S. centric world view" and "personal priorities."
The second post, from September, is by Thomas Kemper, General Secretary of GBGM. He analyzes the language we use to talk about the UMC and makes a distinction among global, worldwide, and international and a distinction among ministry, vision, and structure. He concludes that the UMC's vision and ministries are worldwide in scope, if not quite truly global in the sense of extending to every corner of the world, but our structures are international, in that they extend to many countries, but not nearly the whole world. Secretary Kemper's distinctions in terms are helpful. Though this blog discusses questions related to structure, we also try to feature conversations about vision and ministry around the world and hopefully thereby earn our title of "UM & Global."
It is further illuminating to combine Mr. Kemper's and Mrs. Kenaston's reflections. Questions of structure are often what cause the most conflict in the UMC. Yet Kenaston's suggestions for letting go deal not with structures, but with questions of vision and ministry. She calls for a change in how we view the world and how we set priorities for our work in the world. Largely her calls are a challenge for American United Methodists to undergo a process of self-abnegation and self-limiting to make space for what the Spirit is originating elsewhere. That process of self-abnegation must apply to liberals, evangelicals, and all other factions in the American UMC, who are all guilty of seeing and using our fellow United Methodists as pawns or players in American debates (as this blog has previously highlighted).
Moreover, unless we can open ourselves up to being led by the Spirit on questions of global or worldwide vision and ministry, it is unlikely that we'll be able to adequately solve questions of international structure. As the architect Frank Lloyd Wright famously said, "Form follows function." That dictum is as true in building organizations as it is in building houses. If we try to solve our problems of structure without first addressing questions of vision and ministry on a worldwide scale, we are likely to get the process backwards and let our form dictate our function. If we let our organizational structures or budgets or institutional policies determine our mission, then we're not letting the Spirit lead us in the missio Dei. We'll be left building factions, defending privilege and power, and playing political games.
Form follows function. What functions is the Spirit calling us to perform as a global UMC?
Earlier this year, two great pieces about the worldwide nature of the United Methodist Church appeared on the Connectional Table's "About the Connection" blog. The first, from August, is written by Judi Kenaston, Chair of the Commission on General Conference. In it, she reflects on what has made her United Methodist before moving on to comment on the challenges of thinking about the UMC as a worldwide church. She concludes, "We may need to let go to create a new vision for the World Wide church." Among the things that United Methodists may need to let go of are "our U.S. centric world view" and "personal priorities."
The second post, from September, is by Thomas Kemper, General Secretary of GBGM. He analyzes the language we use to talk about the UMC and makes a distinction among global, worldwide, and international and a distinction among ministry, vision, and structure. He concludes that the UMC's vision and ministries are worldwide in scope, if not quite truly global in the sense of extending to every corner of the world, but our structures are international, in that they extend to many countries, but not nearly the whole world. Secretary Kemper's distinctions in terms are helpful. Though this blog discusses questions related to structure, we also try to feature conversations about vision and ministry around the world and hopefully thereby earn our title of "UM & Global."
It is further illuminating to combine Mr. Kemper's and Mrs. Kenaston's reflections. Questions of structure are often what cause the most conflict in the UMC. Yet Kenaston's suggestions for letting go deal not with structures, but with questions of vision and ministry. She calls for a change in how we view the world and how we set priorities for our work in the world. Largely her calls are a challenge for American United Methodists to undergo a process of self-abnegation and self-limiting to make space for what the Spirit is originating elsewhere. That process of self-abnegation must apply to liberals, evangelicals, and all other factions in the American UMC, who are all guilty of seeing and using our fellow United Methodists as pawns or players in American debates (as this blog has previously highlighted).
Moreover, unless we can open ourselves up to being led by the Spirit on questions of global or worldwide vision and ministry, it is unlikely that we'll be able to adequately solve questions of international structure. As the architect Frank Lloyd Wright famously said, "Form follows function." That dictum is as true in building organizations as it is in building houses. If we try to solve our problems of structure without first addressing questions of vision and ministry on a worldwide scale, we are likely to get the process backwards and let our form dictate our function. If we let our organizational structures or budgets or institutional policies determine our mission, then we're not letting the Spirit lead us in the missio Dei. We'll be left building factions, defending privilege and power, and playing political games.
Form follows function. What functions is the Spirit calling us to perform as a global UMC?
Tuesday, October 28, 2014
Valuable Themes and Unresolved Concerns: Thomas Kemper on Grace Upon Grace: Renewal (Part II)
Today's post is the the second of two concluding posts in a series of posts that are re-examining the mission document of The United Methodist Church, Grace Upon Grace
(Nashville: Graded Press, 1990). Various United Methodist mission professors and practitioners are re-examining this theological statement and how it can inform our corporate life in The United Methodist Church today. This piece is written by Thomas Kemper, General Secretary of the General Board of Global Ministries. Mr. Kemper is commenting on the last section of the document, "Renewal." Use the
"Grace Upon Grace" tag to identify other posts in this series.
We come now to the end of this series of blogs that has explored the continuing relevance and value for mission of Grace Upon Grace, the last official and comprehensive United Methodist statement on mission theology adopted in 1988, closing with the document’s final paragraph (66), 18 lines on the topic of “Renewal.” Having already enumerated two themes from Grace Upon Grace that I find enormously valuable for the renewal of our understanding of and involvement in mission in the first quarter of the 21st century, I now conclude by proposing two clusters of concerns I think were undeveloped in 1988 but must be satisfactorily addressed today if we are to be viable as a church engaged in the missio Dei. Again, my reflections are those of a missional professional, a practitioner, a layman, not a formal theologian, having been a missionary in Brazil with my wife from 1986 to 1994, and now serving as a mission agency executive.
I find Grace Upon Grace lacking in two major ways. First, at least to my mind, it neglects health, healing, and the care of creation as dimensions of the missio Dei. By health and healing I mean more than humanitarian relief and medical services. I also mean spiritual and emotional healthiness, wholeness of person and wholeness of community. Care of creation relates to individuals, families, communities, nations, and to international relations. It incorporates ecology and the use of resources, which has strong economic implications. Mission needs to grapple with broad economic challenges, especially regarding the poor and the conservation of nature.
A second cluster of concerns is the failure of Grace Upon Grace to discern and take into account the mission energy of mission-founded churches in the Global South and Asia. That could even be seen in 1988. We Methodists have been deplorably slow in noticing something that was evident as early as the world missionary conferences of the late 1940s and 1950s that the younger churches are alive and potent with the Gospel and seen by other communions. We have too long navel-gazed about our denominational “worldwide nature” and allowed our structures get in the way of letting loose the gospel energy of our mission progeny. This relates, of course, to the shifting Christian center of gravity from Europe and North America to the global South.
The World Council of Churches’ 2013 statement on Together Towards Life: Mission and Evangelism in Changing Landscapes—a wonderful title for excellent work—takes serious account of the implications for mission of the shifting demography. It recognizes and celebrates not the hope but the reality of mission from what was once seen as the margins—mission in Africa and Korea and Brazil that is alive in indigenous cultures but also reaching into the old Christian heartlands of Italy, Canada, England, and Oklahoma City with the ringing, compelling word and work of the Lord. We of the West may still have the dollars and euros but we are not the only, maybe not the primary, proponents of the missio Dei anymore. God has other missionaries too, and we are thankful that some of them from the Congo, and Colombia and Hong Kong and Ivory Coast are enlisting in service through The United Methodist Church. There will be more—of that I can promise you. There will be many, many more. I truly believe that God really is in charge of mission and will see to that.
Grace Upon Grace will remain a worthy landmark—a clear statement of faith and hope—in our mission pilgrimage. It is dated more by its omissions than its commissions. I keep a copy ready at hand on my desk.
I also keep handy a much shorter document, a statement of only some 850 words on mission theology drafted and adopted at the end of the last quadrennium by the directors of the General Board of Global Ministries. It contains a paragraph on grace at work but it is the last affirmation I want to quote in ending these reflections, for it reminds us of an essential reality of the missio Dei in this and any century:
"The Spirit is always moving to sweep the Church into a new mission age. With openness and gratitude we await the leading of the Spirit in ways not yet seen as God continues to work God’s purposes out in our own day in a new way."
(The full statement can be read online at http://www.umcmission.org/Learn-About-Us/About-Global-Ministries/Theology-of-Mission)
We come now to the end of this series of blogs that has explored the continuing relevance and value for mission of Grace Upon Grace, the last official and comprehensive United Methodist statement on mission theology adopted in 1988, closing with the document’s final paragraph (66), 18 lines on the topic of “Renewal.” Having already enumerated two themes from Grace Upon Grace that I find enormously valuable for the renewal of our understanding of and involvement in mission in the first quarter of the 21st century, I now conclude by proposing two clusters of concerns I think were undeveloped in 1988 but must be satisfactorily addressed today if we are to be viable as a church engaged in the missio Dei. Again, my reflections are those of a missional professional, a practitioner, a layman, not a formal theologian, having been a missionary in Brazil with my wife from 1986 to 1994, and now serving as a mission agency executive.
I find Grace Upon Grace lacking in two major ways. First, at least to my mind, it neglects health, healing, and the care of creation as dimensions of the missio Dei. By health and healing I mean more than humanitarian relief and medical services. I also mean spiritual and emotional healthiness, wholeness of person and wholeness of community. Care of creation relates to individuals, families, communities, nations, and to international relations. It incorporates ecology and the use of resources, which has strong economic implications. Mission needs to grapple with broad economic challenges, especially regarding the poor and the conservation of nature.
A second cluster of concerns is the failure of Grace Upon Grace to discern and take into account the mission energy of mission-founded churches in the Global South and Asia. That could even be seen in 1988. We Methodists have been deplorably slow in noticing something that was evident as early as the world missionary conferences of the late 1940s and 1950s that the younger churches are alive and potent with the Gospel and seen by other communions. We have too long navel-gazed about our denominational “worldwide nature” and allowed our structures get in the way of letting loose the gospel energy of our mission progeny. This relates, of course, to the shifting Christian center of gravity from Europe and North America to the global South.
The World Council of Churches’ 2013 statement on Together Towards Life: Mission and Evangelism in Changing Landscapes—a wonderful title for excellent work—takes serious account of the implications for mission of the shifting demography. It recognizes and celebrates not the hope but the reality of mission from what was once seen as the margins—mission in Africa and Korea and Brazil that is alive in indigenous cultures but also reaching into the old Christian heartlands of Italy, Canada, England, and Oklahoma City with the ringing, compelling word and work of the Lord. We of the West may still have the dollars and euros but we are not the only, maybe not the primary, proponents of the missio Dei anymore. God has other missionaries too, and we are thankful that some of them from the Congo, and Colombia and Hong Kong and Ivory Coast are enlisting in service through The United Methodist Church. There will be more—of that I can promise you. There will be many, many more. I truly believe that God really is in charge of mission and will see to that.
Grace Upon Grace will remain a worthy landmark—a clear statement of faith and hope—in our mission pilgrimage. It is dated more by its omissions than its commissions. I keep a copy ready at hand on my desk.
I also keep handy a much shorter document, a statement of only some 850 words on mission theology drafted and adopted at the end of the last quadrennium by the directors of the General Board of Global Ministries. It contains a paragraph on grace at work but it is the last affirmation I want to quote in ending these reflections, for it reminds us of an essential reality of the missio Dei in this and any century:
"The Spirit is always moving to sweep the Church into a new mission age. With openness and gratitude we await the leading of the Spirit in ways not yet seen as God continues to work God’s purposes out in our own day in a new way."
(The full statement can be read online at http://www.umcmission.org/Learn-About-Us/About-Global-Ministries/Theology-of-Mission)
Thursday, October 16, 2014
Valuable Themes and Unresolved Concerns: Thomas Kemper on Grace Upon Grace: Renewal (Part I)
Today's post is the the first of two concluding posts in a series of posts that are re-examining the mission document of The United Methodist Church, Grace Upon Grace
(Nashville: Graded Press, 1990). Various United Methodist mission
professors and practitioners are re-examining this theological statement
and how it can inform our corporate life in The United Methodist Church
today. This piece is written by Thomas Kemper,
General Secretary of the General Board of Global Ministries.
Mr. Kemper is commenting on the last section of the document, "Renewal." Use the
"Grace Upon Grace" tag to identify other posts in this series.
Begun last November, this series of blogs has explored the continuing relevance and value for mission of Grace Upon Grace, the last official and comprehensive United Methodist statement on mission theology adopted in 1988. We come now to the document’s final paragraph (66), 18 lines on the topic of “Renewal.” This short section presupposes everything that has come before on vision, mission heritage and reform, mission scope and agenda, and the transforming, supporting nature of grace itself. A range of deeply committed missiologists have looked at every section asking whether Grace Upon Grace provides foundation and/or vision for United Methodist engagement in God’s mission in the present century. My reflections here under the banner of “Renewal” must begin by acknowledging with appreciation all of the earlier blogs. They have significantly informed my mission understanding.
By and large, the contributors to the series find continuing value in the more than 25 year-old document, especially the emphasis on the inseparability of grace and mission. There is widespread agreement on mission as grace in action, and near unanimous appreciation for both the Wesleyan interplay of personal piety and social holiness, the Methodist capacity for missional contextualization, and reliance on the Holy Spirit. There are divergent views on Grace Upon Grace’s treatment of Christian mission history in general and Methodist mission history in particular and on whether sections heralding diversity point to realities or are merely oratory. I would agree with both these values and these questions.
The final lines on “Renewal” offer little new to the document. They are valedictory in much the same way as the ending of some of Paul’s epistles: confident, grateful, a bit flowery. The passage quotes the Great Commission, and actually concludes with the benediction from I Thessalonians 5:28: “The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you.” Amen is about all that could be added to that.
I will use my space in this blog post to enumerate two themes from Grace Upon Grace that I find enormously valuable for the renewal of our understanding of and involvement in mission in the first quarter of the 21st century, and in a following post, I will identify two clusters of concerns I think were undeveloped in 1988 but must be satisfactorily addressed today if we are to be viable as a church engaged in the missio Dei. My reflections are those of a missional professional, a practitioner, a layman, not a formal theologian, having been a missionary in Brazil with my wife from 1986 to 1994, and now serving as a mission agency executive.
The two aspects of Grace Upon Grace that I find most profound, most useful, for mission today and in the future are:
1. “Missio Dei” as our starting point. The term has grown steadily more pervasive in the mission vocabulary since 1988. The phrase, borrowed, I understand, from Augustinian roots, surfaced in post-World War II international missionary conferences [notably at Willingen in 1952] but did not gain strong traction until the early 1980s, partly in the context of preparation of the 1982 World Council of Churches document on mission and evangelism. I have informally heard that the late David Bosch, a Roman Catholic from South Africa, strongly influenced that covenant; at least, Bosch became one of the most well-known advocates and interpreters of missio Dei. It has become commonly used in most communions and confessions. The recognition that mission is of God is a major corrective to thinking that we are as humans have a mission to which we invite God’s endorsement and seek divine approval in building the kingdom. Mission and grace comingle, are inseparable. This was powerfully emphasized in my missionary training. But the very commonality of the term and concept gives me pause, as I will explain in my next post.
2. That mission/grace is active is a point strongly underscored in Grace Upon Grace and an insight to which current missionaries, especially the younger one, strongly resonate. I find in our classes of new Global Mission Fellows—42 this year—an enthusiasm to follow an active God. Yet I do not think that we have yet honed or refined an adequate language for speaking of how we as people of faith link into the active, grace-filled missio Dei. What terms and images do we have to name the “how” of church and people becoming part of God’s mission? Very few. We say that God is at work in all places and we must discern the where and join in, but what is the process of discernment that leads to grace-filled affiliation with the divine intention? We cannot resort to a “what is to be will be” theology. How do we decide which mission opportunity to seize upon? I found it instructive in the series of posts that when confronted with the practicalities of discernment, as well as to illustrations of what we mean by “global,” missiologists tell stories of heroic missionaries or other servants of God and the church. Perhaps this is not only appropriate but necessary, that we incarnate the concept of missio Dei in specific disciples, real people whose lives illustrate the action component of mission/grace. Have we any other option? Was not the mission originally incarnated in Jesus of Nazareth, a human being? We must pray that God continues to give us compelling examples of heroic mission.
Begun last November, this series of blogs has explored the continuing relevance and value for mission of Grace Upon Grace, the last official and comprehensive United Methodist statement on mission theology adopted in 1988. We come now to the document’s final paragraph (66), 18 lines on the topic of “Renewal.” This short section presupposes everything that has come before on vision, mission heritage and reform, mission scope and agenda, and the transforming, supporting nature of grace itself. A range of deeply committed missiologists have looked at every section asking whether Grace Upon Grace provides foundation and/or vision for United Methodist engagement in God’s mission in the present century. My reflections here under the banner of “Renewal” must begin by acknowledging with appreciation all of the earlier blogs. They have significantly informed my mission understanding.
By and large, the contributors to the series find continuing value in the more than 25 year-old document, especially the emphasis on the inseparability of grace and mission. There is widespread agreement on mission as grace in action, and near unanimous appreciation for both the Wesleyan interplay of personal piety and social holiness, the Methodist capacity for missional contextualization, and reliance on the Holy Spirit. There are divergent views on Grace Upon Grace’s treatment of Christian mission history in general and Methodist mission history in particular and on whether sections heralding diversity point to realities or are merely oratory. I would agree with both these values and these questions.
The final lines on “Renewal” offer little new to the document. They are valedictory in much the same way as the ending of some of Paul’s epistles: confident, grateful, a bit flowery. The passage quotes the Great Commission, and actually concludes with the benediction from I Thessalonians 5:28: “The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you.” Amen is about all that could be added to that.
I will use my space in this blog post to enumerate two themes from Grace Upon Grace that I find enormously valuable for the renewal of our understanding of and involvement in mission in the first quarter of the 21st century, and in a following post, I will identify two clusters of concerns I think were undeveloped in 1988 but must be satisfactorily addressed today if we are to be viable as a church engaged in the missio Dei. My reflections are those of a missional professional, a practitioner, a layman, not a formal theologian, having been a missionary in Brazil with my wife from 1986 to 1994, and now serving as a mission agency executive.
The two aspects of Grace Upon Grace that I find most profound, most useful, for mission today and in the future are:
1. “Missio Dei” as our starting point. The term has grown steadily more pervasive in the mission vocabulary since 1988. The phrase, borrowed, I understand, from Augustinian roots, surfaced in post-World War II international missionary conferences [notably at Willingen in 1952] but did not gain strong traction until the early 1980s, partly in the context of preparation of the 1982 World Council of Churches document on mission and evangelism. I have informally heard that the late David Bosch, a Roman Catholic from South Africa, strongly influenced that covenant; at least, Bosch became one of the most well-known advocates and interpreters of missio Dei. It has become commonly used in most communions and confessions. The recognition that mission is of God is a major corrective to thinking that we are as humans have a mission to which we invite God’s endorsement and seek divine approval in building the kingdom. Mission and grace comingle, are inseparable. This was powerfully emphasized in my missionary training. But the very commonality of the term and concept gives me pause, as I will explain in my next post.
2. That mission/grace is active is a point strongly underscored in Grace Upon Grace and an insight to which current missionaries, especially the younger one, strongly resonate. I find in our classes of new Global Mission Fellows—42 this year—an enthusiasm to follow an active God. Yet I do not think that we have yet honed or refined an adequate language for speaking of how we as people of faith link into the active, grace-filled missio Dei. What terms and images do we have to name the “how” of church and people becoming part of God’s mission? Very few. We say that God is at work in all places and we must discern the where and join in, but what is the process of discernment that leads to grace-filled affiliation with the divine intention? We cannot resort to a “what is to be will be” theology. How do we decide which mission opportunity to seize upon? I found it instructive in the series of posts that when confronted with the practicalities of discernment, as well as to illustrations of what we mean by “global,” missiologists tell stories of heroic missionaries or other servants of God and the church. Perhaps this is not only appropriate but necessary, that we incarnate the concept of missio Dei in specific disciples, real people whose lives illustrate the action component of mission/grace. Have we any other option? Was not the mission originally incarnated in Jesus of Nazareth, a human being? We must pray that God continues to give us compelling examples of heroic mission.
Thursday, August 7, 2014
Recommended reading: Thomas Kemper on local plans and global connections
Diversity can mean several different things in The United Methodist Church. Americans often think about diversity in terms of racial and ethnic diversity within the United States. This blog is dedicated in part to exploring the diversity of national expressions of United Methodism in different countries around the world. Both of these deal with cultural and racial/ethnic forms of diversity, but the two are distinct, and it's important not to lump all forms of non-white American United Methodism together.
But at the same time that it's important not to conflate domestic racial/ethnic diversity with international racial/ethnic diversity, it's also important not to make the opposite mistake and assume that there are no connections between racial/ethnic minorities in the UMC in the US and United Methodists in other countries. Thomas Kemper, General Secretary of the General Board of Global Ministries (GBGM), has written a great article recently on the connections between the national ministry plans for the denomination's ethnic caucuses in the US and the global mission of the denomination. Kemper rightly points out that these national plans mediate between local ministry and international connections. Especially in this age of international migration, it's impossible to separate local ministry from connections to other countries. The article gives several examples of this phenomenon, but such connections are particularly important for such groups as Hispanics/Latinos, Koreans and Korean-Americans, and Filipinos and Filipino-Americans and other Southeast and East Asian groups.
As part of my work for this blog, I regularly scan United Methodist news on Twitter. The @Hispanic_UMC Twitter feed certainly covers news about ministry to Hispanics/Latinos in the United States, but it also carries a lot of news from Methodists throughout Latin America, most of whom are from sister denominations, not the UMC itself. That Twitter feed is an excellent example of the sort of international connections that are important for shaping the local ministries envisioned by the national plans about which Kemper writes.
Is this juxtaposition of varying geographic levels - local, national, international - confusing? Perhaps. Confusing or not, though, such intersections are an important feature of the often complex scenarios in which The United Methodist Church is called to carry out ministry and mission.
But at the same time that it's important not to conflate domestic racial/ethnic diversity with international racial/ethnic diversity, it's also important not to make the opposite mistake and assume that there are no connections between racial/ethnic minorities in the UMC in the US and United Methodists in other countries. Thomas Kemper, General Secretary of the General Board of Global Ministries (GBGM), has written a great article recently on the connections between the national ministry plans for the denomination's ethnic caucuses in the US and the global mission of the denomination. Kemper rightly points out that these national plans mediate between local ministry and international connections. Especially in this age of international migration, it's impossible to separate local ministry from connections to other countries. The article gives several examples of this phenomenon, but such connections are particularly important for such groups as Hispanics/Latinos, Koreans and Korean-Americans, and Filipinos and Filipino-Americans and other Southeast and East Asian groups.
As part of my work for this blog, I regularly scan United Methodist news on Twitter. The @Hispanic_UMC Twitter feed certainly covers news about ministry to Hispanics/Latinos in the United States, but it also carries a lot of news from Methodists throughout Latin America, most of whom are from sister denominations, not the UMC itself. That Twitter feed is an excellent example of the sort of international connections that are important for shaping the local ministries envisioned by the national plans about which Kemper writes.
Is this juxtaposition of varying geographic levels - local, national, international - confusing? Perhaps. Confusing or not, though, such intersections are an important feature of the often complex scenarios in which The United Methodist Church is called to carry out ministry and mission.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)