For the past year, Rev. Dr. Sahr Yambasu (no relation to the late UMC Bishop John Yambasu) has been serving as President of the Methodist Church in Ireland. The MCI has a one-year, rotating Presidency as its primary leadership office. Yambasu is an immigrant to Ireland from Sierra Leone and the first Black person to hold the Presidency of the MCI. In his final blog post as President, Yambasu reflects back on a life of ministry "Called from the Margins to the Margins." The piece is well worth a read for those interested in the life of a great contemporary Methodist leader, ministry in an ecumenical Methodist partner church, and/or reflections on the missiological concept of "mission from the margins."
Showing posts with label margins. Show all posts
Showing posts with label margins. Show all posts
Friday, June 10, 2022
Recommended Reading: Sahr Yambasu on Ministry at the Margins
Wednesday, June 16, 2021
Why I Will Not Save The United Methodist Church
Today's post is by UM & Global blogmaster Dr. David W. Scott, Mission Theologian at the General Board of Global Ministries. The opinions and analysis expressed here are Dr. Scott's own and do not reflect in any way the official position of Global Ministries.
There are a lot of people out there with a plan to save The United Methodist Church. These plans vary, both in the way they identify what the UMC must be saved from and how to do that saving. They range from implementing new managerial techniques and institutional strategies, to adopting certain social and theological positions, to reconfiguring the structure of the denomination, to saving the best parts of United Methodism by establishing them in a new denomination. Though they don't agree on how, there are a lot of people out there that think they are going to save The United Methodist Church.
Not me.
It's not that I might not like to save The United Methodist Church. As someone who was brought up in a United Methodist congregation, nurturing spiritually and intellectually through a series of United Methodist churches and Methodist-founded colleges, and is currently employed by a United Methodist agency, there are many reasons why I might like to save The United Methodist Church.
And it's not that I don't have any ideas about how The United Methodist Church might be a better version of itself. Anyone who has read this blog long enough knows that I have views on the UMC and some things I think would improve it.
It's more that I have a healthy sense of limitations, both my own and human limitations generally.
First, I take issue with the idea that The United Methodist Church can be saved by any one individual. That notion fits well with the "Great Man" theory of history and with American cultural sensibilities around heroic individualism, but it doesn't fit well with careful study of how social and religious movements actually come to pass.
Renewal movements are just that--movements, which extend far beyond the work or actions of any one person. Certainly, central figures play important roles in movement. Far be it from any religious descendant of John Wesley to say that central figures do not matter to movements. But Wesley did not build the Methodism movement alone. Not only were there many others who worked with him (shout out to Charles!), but he also drew upon ideas that came from outside himself, even if he combined them in sometimes novel ways.
So, if The United Methodist Church is to be saved, it will not be because of the work of some heroic individual, but rather because God has brought about through many contributions the necessary conditions for the denomination's salvation.
Second, while I have some ideas for reform of the church, I am keenly aware of the challenges facing the denomination and my inadequacy to single-handedly solve those problems. Within the United States alone, the denomination is facing a long-term general decline in religiosity, decreasing relevance of denominations, increasing distrust of and antipathy towards institutions, and increasing social and religious polarization. Globally, add to that the challenges of intercultural communication, economic inequality, shifting centers of Christian vitality, and other mega-trends.
While I can list off these challenges, I do not know how the UMC should best steer itself through these stormy waters so as to ensure the continued spiritual growth of its members and organizational well-being for the denomination as a whole. I don't even know how to solve one of these challenges, let alone all of them together.
Third, even if I did have the solutions to these problems, I recognize the limitations of my medium. I write a blog. I have no ability to command the actions of others or the use of resources. The best I can muster is to write something that I hope will be persuasive to the several hundred or couple thousand people that might read it. What they do with whatever ideas they gleam from my writings is outside my direct control. And those people are getting other ideas from other blogs, conversations, podcasts, sermons, etc., most of which probably differ substantially from my ideas.
I have no corner on the market for offering ideas for church renewal. Instead, it's a saturated market, and it is hard for anyone to break through beyond a core audience, let alone to motivate their audience to participate in a movement.
Fourth and finally, I probably come from the wrong social location for someone who will save The United Methodist Church. Historically, saviors come from the margins. They have some connections to the system they reform so as to provide them with enough familiarity with the system and education to think critically about that system, but they're not sitting at the seats of power.
I'm not a bishop or the leader of a large congregation, but I do work for an agency, which gives me some standing in the current system. I am an American, straight, white, well-educated male. I have a lot of privilege. If you were going to look for someone who could save or revitalize The United Methodist Church or the Methodist movement more broadly, that person would probably differ from me in some important part of their identity or background.
So there you go: I'm not going to save The United Methodist Church.
But here's what I am going to do: I'm going to try my best to work faithfully on the task before me with the best knowledge and wisdom I have.
My doing that won't save the denomination. But perhaps my work can make a small contribution toward setting the conditions necessary for Methodism to flourish, in the United States and around the world. Someone else will lead that flourishing, but that's okay with me. I don't need to save the UMC; I just need to be faithful to the work God has given me.
There are a lot of people out there with a plan to save The United Methodist Church. These plans vary, both in the way they identify what the UMC must be saved from and how to do that saving. They range from implementing new managerial techniques and institutional strategies, to adopting certain social and theological positions, to reconfiguring the structure of the denomination, to saving the best parts of United Methodism by establishing them in a new denomination. Though they don't agree on how, there are a lot of people out there that think they are going to save The United Methodist Church.
Not me.
It's not that I might not like to save The United Methodist Church. As someone who was brought up in a United Methodist congregation, nurturing spiritually and intellectually through a series of United Methodist churches and Methodist-founded colleges, and is currently employed by a United Methodist agency, there are many reasons why I might like to save The United Methodist Church.
And it's not that I don't have any ideas about how The United Methodist Church might be a better version of itself. Anyone who has read this blog long enough knows that I have views on the UMC and some things I think would improve it.
It's more that I have a healthy sense of limitations, both my own and human limitations generally.
First, I take issue with the idea that The United Methodist Church can be saved by any one individual. That notion fits well with the "Great Man" theory of history and with American cultural sensibilities around heroic individualism, but it doesn't fit well with careful study of how social and religious movements actually come to pass.
Renewal movements are just that--movements, which extend far beyond the work or actions of any one person. Certainly, central figures play important roles in movement. Far be it from any religious descendant of John Wesley to say that central figures do not matter to movements. But Wesley did not build the Methodism movement alone. Not only were there many others who worked with him (shout out to Charles!), but he also drew upon ideas that came from outside himself, even if he combined them in sometimes novel ways.
So, if The United Methodist Church is to be saved, it will not be because of the work of some heroic individual, but rather because God has brought about through many contributions the necessary conditions for the denomination's salvation.
Second, while I have some ideas for reform of the church, I am keenly aware of the challenges facing the denomination and my inadequacy to single-handedly solve those problems. Within the United States alone, the denomination is facing a long-term general decline in religiosity, decreasing relevance of denominations, increasing distrust of and antipathy towards institutions, and increasing social and religious polarization. Globally, add to that the challenges of intercultural communication, economic inequality, shifting centers of Christian vitality, and other mega-trends.
While I can list off these challenges, I do not know how the UMC should best steer itself through these stormy waters so as to ensure the continued spiritual growth of its members and organizational well-being for the denomination as a whole. I don't even know how to solve one of these challenges, let alone all of them together.
Third, even if I did have the solutions to these problems, I recognize the limitations of my medium. I write a blog. I have no ability to command the actions of others or the use of resources. The best I can muster is to write something that I hope will be persuasive to the several hundred or couple thousand people that might read it. What they do with whatever ideas they gleam from my writings is outside my direct control. And those people are getting other ideas from other blogs, conversations, podcasts, sermons, etc., most of which probably differ substantially from my ideas.
I have no corner on the market for offering ideas for church renewal. Instead, it's a saturated market, and it is hard for anyone to break through beyond a core audience, let alone to motivate their audience to participate in a movement.
Fourth and finally, I probably come from the wrong social location for someone who will save The United Methodist Church. Historically, saviors come from the margins. They have some connections to the system they reform so as to provide them with enough familiarity with the system and education to think critically about that system, but they're not sitting at the seats of power.
I'm not a bishop or the leader of a large congregation, but I do work for an agency, which gives me some standing in the current system. I am an American, straight, white, well-educated male. I have a lot of privilege. If you were going to look for someone who could save or revitalize The United Methodist Church or the Methodist movement more broadly, that person would probably differ from me in some important part of their identity or background.
So there you go: I'm not going to save The United Methodist Church.
But here's what I am going to do: I'm going to try my best to work faithfully on the task before me with the best knowledge and wisdom I have.
My doing that won't save the denomination. But perhaps my work can make a small contribution toward setting the conditions necessary for Methodism to flourish, in the United States and around the world. Someone else will lead that flourishing, but that's okay with me. I don't need to save the UMC; I just need to be faithful to the work God has given me.
Wednesday, March 17, 2021
St. Patrick and Mission from the Margins
Today's post is by UM & Global blogmaster Dr. David W. Scott, Mission Theologian at the General Board of Global Ministries. The opinions and analysis expressed here are Dr. Scott's own and do not reflect in any way the official position of Global Ministries.
Today is St. Patrick's Day, the celebration of Irish heritage. The day is scheduled on the feast day of St. Patrick, the patron saint of Ireland, who is commemorated for bringing Christianity to Ireland. While many will use the day to reflect on what it means to be Irish, I want to use the day to reflect on what it means to be a missionary, like Patrick.
It's easy in contemporary times when thinking about Patrick to think about Patrick's centrality. As a recognized saint not only in Catholicism, but in Eastern Orthodoxy, Anglicanism, and Lutheranism, too, he is a central figure in Christian history. As patron saint of Ireland, he is central to Irish Catholicism and to Irish identity, both in Ireland and throughout the world.
Yet at the beginning of his missionary labors, what would most have struck his contemporaries about Patrick was not his centrality but his marginality. First, he had a marginal status in Ireland. Patrick was a foreigner in Ireland, since he was born a Roman Briton. Worse still, he was a former slave to the Irish. His status as a foreigner and former slave and his refusal to participate in systems of Irish royal patronage left him with a margin legal and social status within the island, without many rights or protections.
Although he would eventually become a bishop, Patrick also held a marginal position in the church at the beginning of his mission. He was ordained and somewhat literate, but relative to other clergy of the time, he had held no prominent positions prior to his mission nor was he well-educated. The two documents he left behind are written in poor Latin. His return to Ireland as a missionary seems to have been a personal decision taken in response to a dream, not a commission by some central authority in the church. Palladius, a wealthy cleric from France, not Patrick, was the first bishop sent by the pope to the Irish to serve as the bishop of the Christians there.
Yet it was Patrick, despite his outsider status in Irish society and marginality within the church hierarchy, who would go on to become revered as the apostle to the Irish, forging Irish Christianity and Irish identity in the process.
Part of this transformation speaks to the process of hagiography and memory that happened after Patrick's death. Patrick's present centrality in tales of Irish nationalism and Irish Christianity speaks to the centuries of retelling and transforming of his story that have happened since his life.
But part of this transformation speaks to some deeper truth about mission. Viewed from a time after the heyday of Western imperialism and well after the founding of Christianity in new regions of the globe, it is easy to associate missionaries with power and prominence, both ecclesial and secular. And in some instances, missionaries did go out with the force of church structures and imperial powers behind them.
But looking carefully at the story of Patrick reminds us that just as often, this was not the case. Successful missionaries have often come, not from the centers of power in their time, but from the margins. They have succeeded in their mission despite and quite often because of their marginality, not their centrality in their contexts. They have embodied Paul's writing in 1 Corinthians 1:26-31, being able to boast only in the Lord, not in their human status.
There is, however, a second takeaway from Patrick's story: the categories of center and margin are not absolute and immutable. Relative to Roman British society, Patrick had some prominence as a semi-literate cleric. But in Irish Celtic society, his status was much lower. Moreover, Patrick's relative marginality or centrality within Irish society changed over the course of his life as he won converts and became bishop and has certainly changed in the centuries since then.
So, the marginal may become those at the center and vice versa. This should not surprise those who proclaim a Messiah who preached that the last will become first and the first will become last. It is a reminder to all Christians that the places and persons where the Holy Spirit is working now and will prosper in the future are not the same as where the powers of the world are now seated. And it is a reminder that when we tell the story of those who brought the gospel to us, we must not let their successes make us forget their origins. Let those who boast, boast in the Lord. Slainte, and Amen!
Today is St. Patrick's Day, the celebration of Irish heritage. The day is scheduled on the feast day of St. Patrick, the patron saint of Ireland, who is commemorated for bringing Christianity to Ireland. While many will use the day to reflect on what it means to be Irish, I want to use the day to reflect on what it means to be a missionary, like Patrick.
It's easy in contemporary times when thinking about Patrick to think about Patrick's centrality. As a recognized saint not only in Catholicism, but in Eastern Orthodoxy, Anglicanism, and Lutheranism, too, he is a central figure in Christian history. As patron saint of Ireland, he is central to Irish Catholicism and to Irish identity, both in Ireland and throughout the world.
Yet at the beginning of his missionary labors, what would most have struck his contemporaries about Patrick was not his centrality but his marginality. First, he had a marginal status in Ireland. Patrick was a foreigner in Ireland, since he was born a Roman Briton. Worse still, he was a former slave to the Irish. His status as a foreigner and former slave and his refusal to participate in systems of Irish royal patronage left him with a margin legal and social status within the island, without many rights or protections.
Although he would eventually become a bishop, Patrick also held a marginal position in the church at the beginning of his mission. He was ordained and somewhat literate, but relative to other clergy of the time, he had held no prominent positions prior to his mission nor was he well-educated. The two documents he left behind are written in poor Latin. His return to Ireland as a missionary seems to have been a personal decision taken in response to a dream, not a commission by some central authority in the church. Palladius, a wealthy cleric from France, not Patrick, was the first bishop sent by the pope to the Irish to serve as the bishop of the Christians there.
Yet it was Patrick, despite his outsider status in Irish society and marginality within the church hierarchy, who would go on to become revered as the apostle to the Irish, forging Irish Christianity and Irish identity in the process.
Part of this transformation speaks to the process of hagiography and memory that happened after Patrick's death. Patrick's present centrality in tales of Irish nationalism and Irish Christianity speaks to the centuries of retelling and transforming of his story that have happened since his life.
But part of this transformation speaks to some deeper truth about mission. Viewed from a time after the heyday of Western imperialism and well after the founding of Christianity in new regions of the globe, it is easy to associate missionaries with power and prominence, both ecclesial and secular. And in some instances, missionaries did go out with the force of church structures and imperial powers behind them.
But looking carefully at the story of Patrick reminds us that just as often, this was not the case. Successful missionaries have often come, not from the centers of power in their time, but from the margins. They have succeeded in their mission despite and quite often because of their marginality, not their centrality in their contexts. They have embodied Paul's writing in 1 Corinthians 1:26-31, being able to boast only in the Lord, not in their human status.
There is, however, a second takeaway from Patrick's story: the categories of center and margin are not absolute and immutable. Relative to Roman British society, Patrick had some prominence as a semi-literate cleric. But in Irish Celtic society, his status was much lower. Moreover, Patrick's relative marginality or centrality within Irish society changed over the course of his life as he won converts and became bishop and has certainly changed in the centuries since then.
So, the marginal may become those at the center and vice versa. This should not surprise those who proclaim a Messiah who preached that the last will become first and the first will become last. It is a reminder to all Christians that the places and persons where the Holy Spirit is working now and will prosper in the future are not the same as where the powers of the world are now seated. And it is a reminder that when we tell the story of those who brought the gospel to us, we must not let their successes make us forget their origins. Let those who boast, boast in the Lord. Slainte, and Amen!
Monday, December 7, 2020
Recommended Viewing: Global Perspectives at Inclusiveness IV Conference
The United Methodist Association of Retired Clergy (UMARC) has sponsored an annual Inclusiveness Conference since 2017. Initially formed to support Bishop Karen Oliveto and LGBTQ+ inclusion in the church, this year's conference focused heavily on racial justice and other forms of inclusion, such as including more global voices in the conference.
The online conference included a set of presentations on "global perspectives" featuring the following speakers:
A UM News Service summary of the conference, including some of Dr. Scott's remarks, can be found here. Other videos from the conference can be found on the UMARC homepage.
The online conference included a set of presentations on "global perspectives" featuring the following speakers:
- Rev. Knut Refsdal of Norway talking about LGBTQ+ inclusion and the state of the church in Europe
- Augustine Bahati of Rwanda talking about the church's work in Africa with marginalized people
- Bishop Rudolfo A. Juan talking about the Christmas Covenant
- David W. Scott of UM & Global talking about the importance of understanding people from other contexts on their own terms and recognizing that Black African lives matter
- Rev. Jasper Peters talking about racial and other inclusion in the Mountain Sky Annual Conference
A UM News Service summary of the conference, including some of Dr. Scott's remarks, can be found here. Other videos from the conference can be found on the UMARC homepage.
Monday, October 26, 2020
Recommended Reading: Evangelism, mission from the margins, and life's 2nd acts
UM News Service recently published a piece on Billie Jean Baker, the recipient of a Harry Denman Evangelism Award from the North Texas Conference. Baker has worked with Oak Lawn United Methodist Church and its associated coffeehouse, Union, to strengthen their outreach to homeless individuals. Baker is formerly homeless herself and has survived a host of other challenges in her life, including sexual abuse, being placed in foster care, dropping out of high school, alcohol and drug abuse, prostitution, divorce, chronic illness, and alienation from some of her children.
I love Baker's story because it so well illustrates two important things about God's call to mission:
First, Baker is an excellent example of mission from the margins. Mainstream society might overlook Baker because of the host of challenges in her past, but God did not. God called Baker to important work, work that Baker was able to do not despite her background but because of it. Because she had experienced homelessness herself, she could connect with other homeless individuals in a way that housed people could not. We should not condone society's marginalization of Baker or others, but we should recognize and celebrate the ways in which God is able to work through those on the margins.
Second, Baker is another example of how often God calls people to significant second acts in their lives. Even for Abram, God didn't call until him until he was 75 years old. While there are certainly many biblical, historical, and contemporary examples of God calling the young, there are also many biblical, historical, and contemporary examples of God calling people to new forms of service at later stages of life, service that goes far beyond what their lives up to that point might have suggested. In Wesleyan terms, God's grace is never done with us. And that is good news indeed.
I love Baker's story because it so well illustrates two important things about God's call to mission:
First, Baker is an excellent example of mission from the margins. Mainstream society might overlook Baker because of the host of challenges in her past, but God did not. God called Baker to important work, work that Baker was able to do not despite her background but because of it. Because she had experienced homelessness herself, she could connect with other homeless individuals in a way that housed people could not. We should not condone society's marginalization of Baker or others, but we should recognize and celebrate the ways in which God is able to work through those on the margins.
Second, Baker is another example of how often God calls people to significant second acts in their lives. Even for Abram, God didn't call until him until he was 75 years old. While there are certainly many biblical, historical, and contemporary examples of God calling the young, there are also many biblical, historical, and contemporary examples of God calling people to new forms of service at later stages of life, service that goes far beyond what their lives up to that point might have suggested. In Wesleyan terms, God's grace is never done with us. And that is good news indeed.
Friday, July 24, 2020
Recommended Readings: The Methodist Church in Great Britain Restructures for Evangelism
At the beginning of this month, the Methodist Church in Great Britain made a significant decision at its yearly Conference meeting. The church voted (online) for a dramatic, ambitious, and sweeping set of changes to the church for the sake of freeing and focusing the church on evangelism and mission. The votes, prompted by a report entitled God for All: The Connexional strategy for evangelism and growth, will simplify church structures to ease decision-making and allow significant resources to be shifted to support a focus on five areas of new initiatives: New Places for New People: Church at the Margins; Every Church a Growing
Church; Young Evangelists, Pioneers, and Leaders; and Digital Presence:
Mission for the digital age.
Readers can find out more about these shifts from the UK-based Church Times, from two stories from the MCGB itself, and from a write-up (in German) by the Swiss UMC.
For readers in the United States, one interesting feature of the MCGB's move is that it comes in the middle of, but is mostly unconnected to, a process of discerning the church's stance on same-sex marriages and LGBTQ ordination. In the US, it is common for Methodists on both sides of those issues to see their resolution as critical to the church's evangelistic success, but the MCGB apparently does not regard clarity on those issues as intrinsic to the process of reorienting the denomination toward mission, evangelism, and membership growth. It has, however, prioritized work with those at the margins, including the economically poor.
The MCGB has indicated that they expect this initiative to take at least five years to begin to bear fruit. While we may have to wait to see the results, I (David) pray that God may bless the MCGB as they strive to be faithful to the call to share the gospel.
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.
Friday, April 5, 2019
The Bicentennial of United Methodist Mission
Today's post is by UM & Global blogmaster Dr. David W. Scott, Director of Mission Theology at the General Board of Global Ministries. This post originally appeared in altered form in the Fall 2018 version of New World Outlook.
Today is the bicentennial of United Methodist mission, commemorating the April 5, 1819, founding of the Missionary Society of the Methodist Episcopal Church, the first denomination-wide mission society in the American tradition of Methodism. The Missionary Society of the Methodist Episcopal Church is also the earliest forerunner of today’s General Board of Global Ministries. The bicentennial is thus both a chance to celebrate mission broadly in The United Methodist Church, its predecessors, and related traditions, and a chance to wish Global Ministries a special “Happy Birthday!”
By observing this milestone anniversary, I hope that reflecting on Methodist mission in the past will inspire and encourage us in the present to lay the groundwork for continued mission by Methodists in the future. In that way, this bicentennial is not just about what God has already done through the people called Methodists as part of God’s mission (missio Dei). It is about what God is doing now and what God will continue to do in years to come.
The Missionary Society was founded by white Methodist leaders in New York City, who were inspired by the work of John Stewart, a lay Methodist of mixed African-American, Native-American, and white heritage, who undertook on his own initiative to conduct evangelistic mission among the Wyandotte (or Wyandot) Native Americans of Ohio. Stewart, working with African-American translator Jonathan Pointer and native converts such as Chief Between-the-Logs, produced a significant movement of Wyandotte who converted to Methodism. It was the first time any native group had chosen to become Methodist in significant numbers, and it gave Methodist leaders hope that Methodism might have something to offer other groups beyond the borders of the developing American nation state.
Forever Beginning
While the founding of the Missionary Society makes a convenient point from which to measure Methodist mission history, designating a precise beginning to Methodist mission is difficult to do. Methodism has in been a missionary movement since its very beginning. The first Methodist mission work outside of the British Isles began in 1759 in Antigua. The first preachers appointed by Wesley to the American colonies were Richard Boardman and Joseph Pillmore, sent in 1769, 50 years prior to the Missionary Society. John Stewart himself started his work in 1816, three years before the Missionary Society.
Even when it comes to mission societies, Methodist origins are complicated. The first denomination-wide mission society in Methodism is the British Wesleyan Methodist Missionary Society (WMMS), approved by the British conference in 1818, the year before its American counterpart was founded (and two years before the 1820 General Conference affirmed that founding for the entire denomination). Yet British Methodists mark their mission history from the WMMS’s creation at the district level in 1813. In the United States, too, there were local and regional mission organizations before the creation of the Missionary Society.
If the Missionary Society was not quite the first mission organization, nor would it be the last started by Methodists. The Methodist Episcopal Church (MEC), Methodist Episcopal Church, South (MECS), Methodist Protestant Church, Evangelical Association, and United Brethren in Christ, all predecessors of today’s United Methodist Church, would found a variety of mission agencies over the course of the 19th century, which conducted a variety of domestic and foreign work. Of particular note were women’s mission societies. The first denomination-wide women’s mission society in Methodism was the MEC Woman’s Foreign Missionary Society (WFMS), founded on March 23, 1869, 50 years after the Missionary Society. Thus, today’s United Methodist Women, heirs of the WFMS, are celebrating their 150th anniversary this year.
These many beginnings yield a conclusion and a corollary about mission. The conclusion is that mission is first and foremost an activity and only secondarily an organization. Mission begins with the activity of God, which churches and individual Christians join in. Yet even for humans, mission activity at least initially precedes mission organization. Thus, many of the great missionaries of Methodism, from John Stewart to William Wadé Harris to William Taylor, boldly went beyond the organizations of their time. Migrants in particular have consistently pushed the church into new forms of mission and therefore mission organization.
The primacy of mission as activity over organization also highlights a corollary: the organizations tasked with mission are always changing and growing. Global Ministries is now 200 years old, and I pray that it may continue to endure as a means of God’s mission for many years to come. But I also expect that Global Ministries will look different in 20, 50, 100, or 200 years than it does now. Such change is natural and a sign that Methodists are being faithful in following God to engage in mission with the world around us as it is currently, and not just as it was in the past.
Moving Forward
When Methodists in the Methodist Episcopal Church and Methodist Episcopal Church, South, came together to celebrate the Centenary of mission a century ago, the tone was different. American Methodists, riding the high of victory in World War I, took a decidedly triumphalist and nationalist approach to celebrating Methodism’s role in God’s mission in the world. Mission was more or less equated with the spread of American democracy. The language used to describe Methodism’s extensive mission work reflected a white, American sense of superiority over other groups, mingled with concern for their well-being.
Yet even in this high point of mission tied to the powers of the world, there were hints of how God was moving in mission among the margins. The first church to reach its financial pledge for the Centenary fundraising drive was not a big-steeple American church. It was a church in Buenos Aires. The group that gave most generously to that fundraising drive was an annual conference of German immigrants in the Pacific Northwest of the US. While the leaders of the Centenary were focused on endorsements from US President Woodrow Wilson, everyday Methodists around the world – in Korea, China, the Philippines, Norway, Denmark, Liberia, and more – used the opportunity to mobilize, to pray, to give generously, and to renew their commitment to follow Jesus in mission. Their work may have been of more enduring value than that of the leading lights of the day.
The world has changed a great deal in the last hundred years, and the church has changed much as well. It is perhaps easier now to recognize that the Holy Spirit is at work in places that were overlooked a century ago. The great growth of Methodism in Africa over the past century is perhaps the most striking example. Looking back over the past 200 years of Methodist mission shows us how God has led Methodists to do great things in mission before and the ways in which God is leading us on to perfection as we seek to do mission in ever better and more faithful ways. Thus, looking back inspires us, informs us, and impels us forward into the next centuries of Methodist mission.
Today is the bicentennial of United Methodist mission, commemorating the April 5, 1819, founding of the Missionary Society of the Methodist Episcopal Church, the first denomination-wide mission society in the American tradition of Methodism. The Missionary Society of the Methodist Episcopal Church is also the earliest forerunner of today’s General Board of Global Ministries. The bicentennial is thus both a chance to celebrate mission broadly in The United Methodist Church, its predecessors, and related traditions, and a chance to wish Global Ministries a special “Happy Birthday!”
By observing this milestone anniversary, I hope that reflecting on Methodist mission in the past will inspire and encourage us in the present to lay the groundwork for continued mission by Methodists in the future. In that way, this bicentennial is not just about what God has already done through the people called Methodists as part of God’s mission (missio Dei). It is about what God is doing now and what God will continue to do in years to come.
The Missionary Society was founded by white Methodist leaders in New York City, who were inspired by the work of John Stewart, a lay Methodist of mixed African-American, Native-American, and white heritage, who undertook on his own initiative to conduct evangelistic mission among the Wyandotte (or Wyandot) Native Americans of Ohio. Stewart, working with African-American translator Jonathan Pointer and native converts such as Chief Between-the-Logs, produced a significant movement of Wyandotte who converted to Methodism. It was the first time any native group had chosen to become Methodist in significant numbers, and it gave Methodist leaders hope that Methodism might have something to offer other groups beyond the borders of the developing American nation state.
Forever Beginning
While the founding of the Missionary Society makes a convenient point from which to measure Methodist mission history, designating a precise beginning to Methodist mission is difficult to do. Methodism has in been a missionary movement since its very beginning. The first Methodist mission work outside of the British Isles began in 1759 in Antigua. The first preachers appointed by Wesley to the American colonies were Richard Boardman and Joseph Pillmore, sent in 1769, 50 years prior to the Missionary Society. John Stewart himself started his work in 1816, three years before the Missionary Society.
Even when it comes to mission societies, Methodist origins are complicated. The first denomination-wide mission society in Methodism is the British Wesleyan Methodist Missionary Society (WMMS), approved by the British conference in 1818, the year before its American counterpart was founded (and two years before the 1820 General Conference affirmed that founding for the entire denomination). Yet British Methodists mark their mission history from the WMMS’s creation at the district level in 1813. In the United States, too, there were local and regional mission organizations before the creation of the Missionary Society.
If the Missionary Society was not quite the first mission organization, nor would it be the last started by Methodists. The Methodist Episcopal Church (MEC), Methodist Episcopal Church, South (MECS), Methodist Protestant Church, Evangelical Association, and United Brethren in Christ, all predecessors of today’s United Methodist Church, would found a variety of mission agencies over the course of the 19th century, which conducted a variety of domestic and foreign work. Of particular note were women’s mission societies. The first denomination-wide women’s mission society in Methodism was the MEC Woman’s Foreign Missionary Society (WFMS), founded on March 23, 1869, 50 years after the Missionary Society. Thus, today’s United Methodist Women, heirs of the WFMS, are celebrating their 150th anniversary this year.
These many beginnings yield a conclusion and a corollary about mission. The conclusion is that mission is first and foremost an activity and only secondarily an organization. Mission begins with the activity of God, which churches and individual Christians join in. Yet even for humans, mission activity at least initially precedes mission organization. Thus, many of the great missionaries of Methodism, from John Stewart to William Wadé Harris to William Taylor, boldly went beyond the organizations of their time. Migrants in particular have consistently pushed the church into new forms of mission and therefore mission organization.
The primacy of mission as activity over organization also highlights a corollary: the organizations tasked with mission are always changing and growing. Global Ministries is now 200 years old, and I pray that it may continue to endure as a means of God’s mission for many years to come. But I also expect that Global Ministries will look different in 20, 50, 100, or 200 years than it does now. Such change is natural and a sign that Methodists are being faithful in following God to engage in mission with the world around us as it is currently, and not just as it was in the past.
Moving Forward
When Methodists in the Methodist Episcopal Church and Methodist Episcopal Church, South, came together to celebrate the Centenary of mission a century ago, the tone was different. American Methodists, riding the high of victory in World War I, took a decidedly triumphalist and nationalist approach to celebrating Methodism’s role in God’s mission in the world. Mission was more or less equated with the spread of American democracy. The language used to describe Methodism’s extensive mission work reflected a white, American sense of superiority over other groups, mingled with concern for their well-being.
Yet even in this high point of mission tied to the powers of the world, there were hints of how God was moving in mission among the margins. The first church to reach its financial pledge for the Centenary fundraising drive was not a big-steeple American church. It was a church in Buenos Aires. The group that gave most generously to that fundraising drive was an annual conference of German immigrants in the Pacific Northwest of the US. While the leaders of the Centenary were focused on endorsements from US President Woodrow Wilson, everyday Methodists around the world – in Korea, China, the Philippines, Norway, Denmark, Liberia, and more – used the opportunity to mobilize, to pray, to give generously, and to renew their commitment to follow Jesus in mission. Their work may have been of more enduring value than that of the leading lights of the day.
The world has changed a great deal in the last hundred years, and the church has changed much as well. It is perhaps easier now to recognize that the Holy Spirit is at work in places that were overlooked a century ago. The great growth of Methodism in Africa over the past century is perhaps the most striking example. Looking back over the past 200 years of Methodist mission shows us how God has led Methodists to do great things in mission before and the ways in which God is leading us on to perfection as we seek to do mission in ever better and more faithful ways. Thus, looking back inspires us, informs us, and impels us forward into the next centuries of Methodist mission.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)