For those looking to learn more about United Methodism outside the United States, several recent interviews with bishops from the central conferences are a good way to do that. Here's a list:
Joe Iovino interviews German bishop Harald Rückert for the Get Your Spirit in Shape podcast.
Joe Iovino interviews Filipino bishop Rodolfo A. Juan for the Get Your Spirit in Shape podcast.
Bishop Christian Alsted gives a short overview of The United Methodist Church in Norway.
Dedicated to fostering conversations about the global nature of The United Methodist Church
Monday, March 12, 2018
Wednesday, March 7, 2018
Mission, Structure, and Innovation
Today's post is by UM & Global blogmaster Dr. David W. Scott, Director of Mission Theology 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.
In a previous post, I compared the historical arc of (primarily white) American Methodism over the past century with the story of the tower of Babel. American Methodists sought to build impressive towers, both literally in terms of church buildings and metaphorically in terms of organizational systems. Our languages, however, have become confused from one another so that we have been unable to keep building our organizational towers.
Yet even if we were able to continue to build our organizational towers, there would still be dangers. Organizations tend toward standardization and bureaucratization, which leads to rigidity. But rigidity leads to fragility, both in physical buildings and in organizational systems. Physical buildings that do not have give can be toppled by strong winds or earthquakes. Organizations that do not have give exclude innovation and thus can be toppled by the daily (strong winds) or cataclysmic (earthquakes) changes of our world.
Innovation is necessary for the long-term success of organizations. Without innovation, organizations become maladapted to a changing world. But organizational systematization is both a human need and a powerful temptation that can lead groups to exclude innovation.
In Christianity, mission is often the innovation of the church. This is especially true of evangelism, which starts new church congregations and brings in new Christians. This type of innovation provides Christianity a basic necessary organizational resource for its continuation – adherents. Yet other forms of mission can also be a form of innovation. Mission of compassion and social justice mission both witness to God’s reign by meeting the pressing, current pains of the world and thus keeping the church connected to a changing world.
If we care about mission, then we should ask: How can we foster innovation as United Methodists?
There are many skills, beliefs, knowledge sets, and behaviors required for successful evangelism/mission/innovation. One answer to the question of how we foster innovation could thus look at how to impart these skills, beliefs, knowledge sets, and behaviors to United Methodists.
But I think it is important to recognize that innovation is already happening all the time in the church, whether that’s through Fresh Expressions, mission in new countries started by African annual conferences, dinner churches, creation care ministries, migrant ministries in Germany, etc. I think people are naturally creative and innovative, and some level of innovation happens no matter what.
Thus, another approach to the question of how to foster innovation in United Methodism is to ask how we can recognize and structurally support the innovations that are already happening. How can we empower and legitimize those who are already innovating?
Of course, there’s a larger question of whether The United Methodist Church actually wants innovation. The book Immunity to Change suggests that people don’t change dysfunctional systems because those systems are actually working for them, they are providing the people involved with something important, even if there are negative consequences associated with it. We may not actually want innovation and change in the UMC if we see it as jeopardizing deeply held beliefs, values, habits. Even if a lack of innovation slowly kills us, we may be willing to accept that death if it means we don’t have to live without our cherished traditions and existing structures.
We’re going to assume, though, that the UMC, or at least those interested in mission in the UMC, are open to change, are willing to risk some of what they currently get from the church for the sake of something new. Thus, my next two blog posts will look at the question of how organizational forms can succeed in fostering innovation.
In a previous post, I compared the historical arc of (primarily white) American Methodism over the past century with the story of the tower of Babel. American Methodists sought to build impressive towers, both literally in terms of church buildings and metaphorically in terms of organizational systems. Our languages, however, have become confused from one another so that we have been unable to keep building our organizational towers.
Yet even if we were able to continue to build our organizational towers, there would still be dangers. Organizations tend toward standardization and bureaucratization, which leads to rigidity. But rigidity leads to fragility, both in physical buildings and in organizational systems. Physical buildings that do not have give can be toppled by strong winds or earthquakes. Organizations that do not have give exclude innovation and thus can be toppled by the daily (strong winds) or cataclysmic (earthquakes) changes of our world.
Innovation is necessary for the long-term success of organizations. Without innovation, organizations become maladapted to a changing world. But organizational systematization is both a human need and a powerful temptation that can lead groups to exclude innovation.
In Christianity, mission is often the innovation of the church. This is especially true of evangelism, which starts new church congregations and brings in new Christians. This type of innovation provides Christianity a basic necessary organizational resource for its continuation – adherents. Yet other forms of mission can also be a form of innovation. Mission of compassion and social justice mission both witness to God’s reign by meeting the pressing, current pains of the world and thus keeping the church connected to a changing world.
If we care about mission, then we should ask: How can we foster innovation as United Methodists?
There are many skills, beliefs, knowledge sets, and behaviors required for successful evangelism/mission/innovation. One answer to the question of how we foster innovation could thus look at how to impart these skills, beliefs, knowledge sets, and behaviors to United Methodists.
But I think it is important to recognize that innovation is already happening all the time in the church, whether that’s through Fresh Expressions, mission in new countries started by African annual conferences, dinner churches, creation care ministries, migrant ministries in Germany, etc. I think people are naturally creative and innovative, and some level of innovation happens no matter what.
Thus, another approach to the question of how to foster innovation in United Methodism is to ask how we can recognize and structurally support the innovations that are already happening. How can we empower and legitimize those who are already innovating?
Of course, there’s a larger question of whether The United Methodist Church actually wants innovation. The book Immunity to Change suggests that people don’t change dysfunctional systems because those systems are actually working for them, they are providing the people involved with something important, even if there are negative consequences associated with it. We may not actually want innovation and change in the UMC if we see it as jeopardizing deeply held beliefs, values, habits. Even if a lack of innovation slowly kills us, we may be willing to accept that death if it means we don’t have to live without our cherished traditions and existing structures.
We’re going to assume, though, that the UMC, or at least those interested in mission in the UMC, are open to change, are willing to risk some of what they currently get from the church for the sake of something new. Thus, my next two blog posts will look at the question of how organizational forms can succeed in fostering innovation.
Monday, March 5, 2018
Recommended Reading: Mission: what are we missing?
Missio Dei has become a critical term in contemporary missiology. It was developed in large part to critique an approach to mission that was dominated by the Western church, propagating Western imperialism and institutional concerns. This helpful reflection from French missiology Gerard Kelly examines ways in which we can still fail to fully understand missio Dei by making it still primarily about human action. Kelly offers five affirmations about missio Dei that he believes can provide for a more faithful, joyful approach to mission.
Wednesday, February 28, 2018
Methodism is for Migrants
Today's post is by UM & Global blogmaster Dr. David W. Scott, Director of Mission Theology 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.
I’d like to start with an assertion: Migrants have been and continue to be one of the largest venues for Methodist growth.
Hearing this statement, one might initially think about international migrants in the history of Methodism. Here, one could reflect on Methodist growth among English, Scottish, Irish, German, Norwegian, Swedish, Chinese, Japanese, Italian, Czech, Korean, and Filipino immigrants to the US, all of which represented growing Methodist immigrant populations in the US at one point.
One could also point to the historical connection between migration and Methodist growth outside the US. Here, the stories could include the migrant settlers of Liberia who were the first to practice American Methodism outside the US; the Germans and Scandinavians converted to Methodism through return migration by their fellows who had become Methodist in the US; the migration of soldiers, sailors, and businesspeople throughout the British Empire, and the spread of Methodism along these lines; or the growth of Methodism among Chinese and Indian migrants in Southeast Asia.
These examples of international migration and the growth of Methodism might be interesting but still seem peripheral, insufficient to prove the enormity of the claim. It’s when we expand our scope of migration to include domestic migration that we fully see the link between Methodism and migration.
The quintessential story of Methodist growth is the circuit riders and the growth of Methodism along the expanding American frontier. This historical epoch is the often portrayed as a golden age of Methodism upon which we should model current evangelistic efforts. It is worthwhile noting, therefore, that the frontier was populated by migrants, people that had moved to the frontier from more settled lands farther back east. In places that we now think of as Methodist strongholds like Georgia and Texas, Methodism arrived there along with migrants for the sake of serving them.
We can apply this insight elsewhere in the world, too, especially as we look at the phenomenon of urban migration. While in some settings (the US, Zimbabwe), Methodism was predominantly rural and was slow to adapt to the strong trend of migration to cities in the 20th century, in other areas (China), Methodism first enter a society through its cities, and urban migration was a boon to the church.
Moreover, this linkage between migration, both international and domestic, and the expansion of Methodism, both in the US and elsewhere around the world, continues today.
In the US, international migration is boosting the UMC through the formation of new migrant churches. As I have demonstrated elsewhere, it’s the non-white segments of the UMC in the US that are growing, especially among Asians/Pacific Islanders and Hispanics, two Methodist communities for whom immigration is an important factor. Even among white American Methodism, the growing spots are frequently suburban megachurches. One important factor in these churches’ growth has been the population growth of their surroundings. People have been migrating to the suburbs in the US (especially in the South and Southeast) for decades now.
Looking elsewhere around the world, one sees immigrants as crucial to the continuation of Methodism in Europe. African and Asian Methodists are filling pews increasingly empty of native-born white Europeans. Migratory connections have been important for the growth of the church in new mission initiatives, whether that’s in Southeast Asia or Africa. United Methodists in Liberia and Sierra Leone suffered a long and painful series of forced migrations during those countries’ civil wars. Yet new churches came out of that awful experience, and these two countries are now one of the few areas of the world where United Methodism is growing.
Of course, not all instances of Methodist growth have occurred among or because of migrants. For instance, to my knowledge, the dramatic growth of Methodism in Korea or the Democratic Republic of Congo was not fueled by migration. (It is perhaps worth noting that in both instances, Methodism did grow in large part because of its political identification was people suffering from war and foreign incursion.)
Still, even if migration is not always a root cause for Methodist growth, I think it is safe to say that it is one of the primary root causes for Methodist growth.
If we accept this insight, it leaves us with a question: If we care about the growth of Methodism, how can we leverage this linkage between migration and Methodist growth to further that growth? How do we structure our churches, our evangelistic campaigns, our mission initiatives to best reflect this insight? And how do United Methodists as citizens act on this insight in a world that both has more migrants, internal and international, than ever before, but which is seeing increasing anti-migrant sentiment? How we treat the migrants in our midst is ultimately not just a political or moral question, it’s a missional one.
I’d like to start with an assertion: Migrants have been and continue to be one of the largest venues for Methodist growth.
Hearing this statement, one might initially think about international migrants in the history of Methodism. Here, one could reflect on Methodist growth among English, Scottish, Irish, German, Norwegian, Swedish, Chinese, Japanese, Italian, Czech, Korean, and Filipino immigrants to the US, all of which represented growing Methodist immigrant populations in the US at one point.
One could also point to the historical connection between migration and Methodist growth outside the US. Here, the stories could include the migrant settlers of Liberia who were the first to practice American Methodism outside the US; the Germans and Scandinavians converted to Methodism through return migration by their fellows who had become Methodist in the US; the migration of soldiers, sailors, and businesspeople throughout the British Empire, and the spread of Methodism along these lines; or the growth of Methodism among Chinese and Indian migrants in Southeast Asia.
These examples of international migration and the growth of Methodism might be interesting but still seem peripheral, insufficient to prove the enormity of the claim. It’s when we expand our scope of migration to include domestic migration that we fully see the link between Methodism and migration.
The quintessential story of Methodist growth is the circuit riders and the growth of Methodism along the expanding American frontier. This historical epoch is the often portrayed as a golden age of Methodism upon which we should model current evangelistic efforts. It is worthwhile noting, therefore, that the frontier was populated by migrants, people that had moved to the frontier from more settled lands farther back east. In places that we now think of as Methodist strongholds like Georgia and Texas, Methodism arrived there along with migrants for the sake of serving them.
We can apply this insight elsewhere in the world, too, especially as we look at the phenomenon of urban migration. While in some settings (the US, Zimbabwe), Methodism was predominantly rural and was slow to adapt to the strong trend of migration to cities in the 20th century, in other areas (China), Methodism first enter a society through its cities, and urban migration was a boon to the church.
Moreover, this linkage between migration, both international and domestic, and the expansion of Methodism, both in the US and elsewhere around the world, continues today.
In the US, international migration is boosting the UMC through the formation of new migrant churches. As I have demonstrated elsewhere, it’s the non-white segments of the UMC in the US that are growing, especially among Asians/Pacific Islanders and Hispanics, two Methodist communities for whom immigration is an important factor. Even among white American Methodism, the growing spots are frequently suburban megachurches. One important factor in these churches’ growth has been the population growth of their surroundings. People have been migrating to the suburbs in the US (especially in the South and Southeast) for decades now.
Looking elsewhere around the world, one sees immigrants as crucial to the continuation of Methodism in Europe. African and Asian Methodists are filling pews increasingly empty of native-born white Europeans. Migratory connections have been important for the growth of the church in new mission initiatives, whether that’s in Southeast Asia or Africa. United Methodists in Liberia and Sierra Leone suffered a long and painful series of forced migrations during those countries’ civil wars. Yet new churches came out of that awful experience, and these two countries are now one of the few areas of the world where United Methodism is growing.
Of course, not all instances of Methodist growth have occurred among or because of migrants. For instance, to my knowledge, the dramatic growth of Methodism in Korea or the Democratic Republic of Congo was not fueled by migration. (It is perhaps worth noting that in both instances, Methodism did grow in large part because of its political identification was people suffering from war and foreign incursion.)
Still, even if migration is not always a root cause for Methodist growth, I think it is safe to say that it is one of the primary root causes for Methodist growth.
If we accept this insight, it leaves us with a question: If we care about the growth of Methodism, how can we leverage this linkage between migration and Methodist growth to further that growth? How do we structure our churches, our evangelistic campaigns, our mission initiatives to best reflect this insight? And how do United Methodists as citizens act on this insight in a world that both has more migrants, internal and international, than ever before, but which is seeing increasing anti-migrant sentiment? How we treat the migrants in our midst is ultimately not just a political or moral question, it’s a missional one.
Monday, February 26, 2018
Recommended Readings: Migration Roundup
United Methodists around the world celebrated Global Migration Sunday on Dec. 3, 2017. In the almost three months since then, migration has continued to be a significant topic for United Methodists. Here’s a roundup of some of the recent United Methodist news stories related to migration.
Global Migration Sunday
The UMNS story “Churches unite in support of migrants” reports on how United Methodists observed Global Migration Sunday.
Methodists Understanding Migration
In “Who’s in, who’s out: Migrants and a compact,” Church and Society’s Levi Bautista reflects on the state of migrants in the church and UN work.
United Methodist Women published a video entitled “People on the Move: The Global Face of Migration” explaining the phenomenon of global migration.
United Methodists participated in the United Nations-sponsored “Fourth Annual Symposium on the Role of Religion and Faith-based Organizations in International Affairs,” which focused this year on migration, as UMNS reported in its story, “Faith groups put human face on migration.” More on the symposium can be found at “Symposium Highlights.”
Methodists Theologizing Migration
The General Commission on Religion and Race (GCORR) offers theological reflections on the treatment of migrants drawing on the Akan notion of “Akwaaba,” meaning welcome, as shared in this article, entitled “Akwaaba: Learning the Art of Hospitality from Akan Wisdom.”
Rev. Lyndy Zabel shares theological learnings about the sojourner from a Minnesota Annual Conference symposium in a pieced titled, “No one left behind,” shared by Church and Society.
Methodist Ministries with Migrants
National Justice for Our Neighbors (NJFON), a United Methodist-affiliated immigration ministry, released its 2017 Annual Impact Report.
NJFON also announced the opening of a new JFON site in Tucson.
NJFON also shared the story of Linh, one of them women who has benefitted from the services of the Nebraska affiliate.
UMW posted this video detailing the work with migrants supported by UMW at The Batis Center in the Philippines.
In Germany, the UMC announced a new “Network founded for work with migrants.”
Methodist Hospitality for Migrants
UMNS writer Heather Hanh draws parallels between the tradition of Las Posadas and Elizabeth, an immigrant helped by Northern Illinois Justice for Our Neighbors, in “How an immigrant family found room at the inn.”
In “Family finds sanctuary,” the Michigan Episcopal Area reports on a family offered sanctuary by one of its congregations.
UMNS reports that despite the best efforts of a Florida United Methodist church, “Immigrant supported by church deported.”
Methodists Advocating for Migrants
As UMNS reported, United Methodists were among those joining in “Protests for Dreamers [that led] to arrests.”
In “Bishop: Immigration plan needs care and prayers,” UMNS reports on Bishop Minerva Carcaño’s position on DACA negotions.
All United Methodist Bishops joined together to “condemn Trump’s offensive remarks against immigrants,” as UMNS reported.
Nor was that condemnation limited to the bishops, as UMNS reported in “United Methodists join in Trump rebuke.”
Church and Society encourages United Methodists to sign up for Ecumenical Advocacy Days for Global Peace with Justice, which this year will focus on migration.
Migrant Methodists Contributing to the Church
UMNS profiled Ghanaian and Vietnamese migrant churches in Germany in the piece “Migrant Churches Provide Piece of Home.”
The companion piece “Journey to pulpit began in peril” profiles the only Vietnamese immigrant pastor in the German UMC.
Expressing a sentiment common to many German United Methodists, Bishop Harald Rückert says that in such migrants, “I have seen the future of our church.”
Immigrant pastor Marcelo Gomes shares his work among fellow immigrants in Massachuestts and Florida in the piece “Fertile Ground in Miami for Brazilian Faith Communities.”
Bishop Hee-Soo Jung reflects on the contributions to the wider church made by Korean immigrant and Korean-American United Methodists in “5 Propositions for Korean UMC.”
Migrant Methodists Contributing to Society
United Methodist and Liberian immigrant Wilmot Collins will serve as mayor of Helena, Montana, as UMNS reported in “Refugee U.S. mayor-elect is United Methodist.”
Global Migration Sunday
The UMNS story “Churches unite in support of migrants” reports on how United Methodists observed Global Migration Sunday.
Methodists Understanding Migration
In “Who’s in, who’s out: Migrants and a compact,” Church and Society’s Levi Bautista reflects on the state of migrants in the church and UN work.
United Methodist Women published a video entitled “People on the Move: The Global Face of Migration” explaining the phenomenon of global migration.
United Methodists participated in the United Nations-sponsored “Fourth Annual Symposium on the Role of Religion and Faith-based Organizations in International Affairs,” which focused this year on migration, as UMNS reported in its story, “Faith groups put human face on migration.” More on the symposium can be found at “Symposium Highlights.”
Methodists Theologizing Migration
The General Commission on Religion and Race (GCORR) offers theological reflections on the treatment of migrants drawing on the Akan notion of “Akwaaba,” meaning welcome, as shared in this article, entitled “Akwaaba: Learning the Art of Hospitality from Akan Wisdom.”
Rev. Lyndy Zabel shares theological learnings about the sojourner from a Minnesota Annual Conference symposium in a pieced titled, “No one left behind,” shared by Church and Society.
Methodist Ministries with Migrants
National Justice for Our Neighbors (NJFON), a United Methodist-affiliated immigration ministry, released its 2017 Annual Impact Report.
NJFON also announced the opening of a new JFON site in Tucson.
NJFON also shared the story of Linh, one of them women who has benefitted from the services of the Nebraska affiliate.
UMW posted this video detailing the work with migrants supported by UMW at The Batis Center in the Philippines.
In Germany, the UMC announced a new “Network founded for work with migrants.”
Methodist Hospitality for Migrants
UMNS writer Heather Hanh draws parallels between the tradition of Las Posadas and Elizabeth, an immigrant helped by Northern Illinois Justice for Our Neighbors, in “How an immigrant family found room at the inn.”
In “Family finds sanctuary,” the Michigan Episcopal Area reports on a family offered sanctuary by one of its congregations.
UMNS reports that despite the best efforts of a Florida United Methodist church, “Immigrant supported by church deported.”
Methodists Advocating for Migrants
As UMNS reported, United Methodists were among those joining in “Protests for Dreamers [that led] to arrests.”
In “Bishop: Immigration plan needs care and prayers,” UMNS reports on Bishop Minerva Carcaño’s position on DACA negotions.
All United Methodist Bishops joined together to “condemn Trump’s offensive remarks against immigrants,” as UMNS reported.
Nor was that condemnation limited to the bishops, as UMNS reported in “United Methodists join in Trump rebuke.”
Church and Society encourages United Methodists to sign up for Ecumenical Advocacy Days for Global Peace with Justice, which this year will focus on migration.
Migrant Methodists Contributing to the Church
UMNS profiled Ghanaian and Vietnamese migrant churches in Germany in the piece “Migrant Churches Provide Piece of Home.”
The companion piece “Journey to pulpit began in peril” profiles the only Vietnamese immigrant pastor in the German UMC.
Expressing a sentiment common to many German United Methodists, Bishop Harald Rückert says that in such migrants, “I have seen the future of our church.”
Immigrant pastor Marcelo Gomes shares his work among fellow immigrants in Massachuestts and Florida in the piece “Fertile Ground in Miami for Brazilian Faith Communities.”
Bishop Hee-Soo Jung reflects on the contributions to the wider church made by Korean immigrant and Korean-American United Methodists in “5 Propositions for Korean UMC.”
Migrant Methodists Contributing to Society
United Methodist and Liberian immigrant Wilmot Collins will serve as mayor of Helena, Montana, as UMNS reported in “Refugee U.S. mayor-elect is United Methodist.”
Friday, February 23, 2018
Analysis of the locations of World Methodist Council denominations
Today's post is by UM & Global blogmaster Dr. David W. Scott, Director of Mission Theology 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.
Earlier this week, I posted a series of maps indicating which World Methodist Council (WMC) member denominations have churches in which countries or territories. As indicated in that post, there are a few disclaimers: the data’s not perfect; it neglects Korean Methodist Church mission; it only shows presence, not relative membership; and it’s hard to decide whether to classify some territories separately from their ruling country. Nevertheless, it’s still possible to draw several conclusions about WMC member denominations and thus the Wesleyan/Methodist movement as a whole from this data.
First, a word on the types of denominations that are part of the WMC may be useful. I have separated WMC member denominations into either national and international bodies.
National bodies are of three types:
1. Autonomous churches formerly affiliated with either British or American Methodism (located in Oceania, Asia, Africa, and especially Latin America)
2. A few autonomous churches recently started in Latin American independently of British or American Methodists
3. United/Uniting denominations incorporating Methodist churches at one point affiliated with British Methodists or the Evangelical United Brethren (in Oceania, Asia, Africa, and Europe)
International bodies are of four types:
1. The Methodist Church of Southern Africa (MCSA) and the Methodist Church in the Caribbean and the Americas (MCCA) are regional denominations, as indicated in their names.
2. There are three historically African-American churches that now including branches in Africa, the Caribbean, South America, India, and Europe (mostly the UK). These are the African Methodist Episcopal (AME) Church, the African Methodist Episcopal Zion (A.M.E. Zion) Church, and the Christian Methodist Episcopal (CME) Church.
3. The United Methodist Church is a semi-global denomination present in some but not all areas of the world, whose presence/absence was shaped by a series of autonomy departures, mostly in the 60s and 70s.
4. There are three global holiness denominations, located on all continents with no or little history of autonomous separations; therefore, these three are the most widely spread. These are the Church of the Nazarene, The Wesleyan Church, and the Free Methodist Church.
The Korean Methodist Church may deserve to be a fifth type of international church. I know they have member congregations in the United States that are fully integrated into their system of governance. I do not know what the relationships between the parent denomination and newly planted mission churches in other countries are like.
Now, some conclusions drawn by looking at the country-level data:
1. There is a wide range in terms of Wesleyan/Methodist denominational presence in particular countries, from a hundred or fewer members to a million or more members in one denomination in one particular country.
2. Countries with no Wesleyan Methodist presence are mostly Muslim and/or have a small population. This finding is not particularly surprising, as the difficulties in prompting Muslim conversions and the restrictions on religion in Muslim-majority countries are well-documented, and one might reasonably expect small population countries to be less able to support a variety of denominations.
3. Countries with a lot of Wesleyan/Methodist denominations are mostly former parts of the British or US empires. 80% of those countries with 5+ denominations present and all of those countries with 7-8 denominations present are former parts of the British or US empires. (The US empire was less extensive and less formal than the British Empire, but I’m including here the US Virgin Islands, Haiti, the Philippines, and Liberia, all of which were controlled at times by Americans or American settlers.) Again, given the extensive literature on the relationship between mission and empire, especially Protestant mission and the British Empire, this finding is not particularly surprising.
4. The Democratic Republic of Congo, Togo, and Mozambique stand out as particularly receptive to Wesleyan/Methodist denominations, despite lacking an Anglo-American colonial past. All three countries have 6 WMC member denominations. Cote d’Ivoire has 5 WMC member denominations and no Anglo-American colonialism, which is also notable. While all four countries have neighbors with British colonial pasts, more research into why these countries in particular have been receptive to Wesleyan/Methodist traditions would be welcome.
5. Despite the Wesleyan/Methodist movement’s roots in European Pietism and European Enlightenment thought, Europe is not terribly receptive to Wesleyan/Methodist denominations. Most European countries (other than the United Kingdom) have 1-3 WMC member denominations, and their memberships are small. Strong state churches, historic restrictions on religious freedom, and current secularization are all part of this story, but it is worth asking whether there are any other factors at play here.
6. The Wesleyan/Methodist movement is stronger in Latin America than Europe. In most Latin American countries, autonomous Methodist churches and the three holiness churches all have a presence. While many are small, membership is often higher than that in similarly-sized European countries. Latin America shares some cultural history with Europe. It, too, has had dominant state (Catholic) churches and historic religious restrictions. Given these similarities, the question then becomes, why has Wesleyanism/Methodism done better in Latin American than Europe?
7. Southeast Asia is one of the hot new mission fields for Wesleyan/Methodist work, attracting both UMC and holiness mission work. Thailand and Cambodia have new mission work from four denominations, Myanmar has new mission work from three denominations, and Vietnam, Laos, and Indonesia have all attracted two denominations in recent years. All of these new branches of Wesleyanism/Methodism are currently small but growing. More work needs to be done on why Southeast Asia has been such a focus for Wesleyan/Methodist growth in recent years.
Finally, it is worth noting that competition may or may not be good for Wesleyans/Methodists. According to Rodney Stark and Roger Finke, the presence of large numbers of denominations may provide options for religious consumers and/or indicate a de-regulated religious market. They argue that both these factors generally promote high levels of religious affiliation. Thus, competition may be good for membership. Nevertheless, competition also involves duplication of effort, confusion among members and potential converts, conflicts over access to resources, and a potential failure to embody the unity of Christ. Thus, while data shows where WMC member denominations are and are not located, it cannot determine whether these patterns of presence are ultimately good or bad.
Earlier this week, I posted a series of maps indicating which World Methodist Council (WMC) member denominations have churches in which countries or territories. As indicated in that post, there are a few disclaimers: the data’s not perfect; it neglects Korean Methodist Church mission; it only shows presence, not relative membership; and it’s hard to decide whether to classify some territories separately from their ruling country. Nevertheless, it’s still possible to draw several conclusions about WMC member denominations and thus the Wesleyan/Methodist movement as a whole from this data.
First, a word on the types of denominations that are part of the WMC may be useful. I have separated WMC member denominations into either national and international bodies.
National bodies are of three types:
1. Autonomous churches formerly affiliated with either British or American Methodism (located in Oceania, Asia, Africa, and especially Latin America)
2. A few autonomous churches recently started in Latin American independently of British or American Methodists
3. United/Uniting denominations incorporating Methodist churches at one point affiliated with British Methodists or the Evangelical United Brethren (in Oceania, Asia, Africa, and Europe)
International bodies are of four types:
1. The Methodist Church of Southern Africa (MCSA) and the Methodist Church in the Caribbean and the Americas (MCCA) are regional denominations, as indicated in their names.
2. There are three historically African-American churches that now including branches in Africa, the Caribbean, South America, India, and Europe (mostly the UK). These are the African Methodist Episcopal (AME) Church, the African Methodist Episcopal Zion (A.M.E. Zion) Church, and the Christian Methodist Episcopal (CME) Church.
3. The United Methodist Church is a semi-global denomination present in some but not all areas of the world, whose presence/absence was shaped by a series of autonomy departures, mostly in the 60s and 70s.
4. There are three global holiness denominations, located on all continents with no or little history of autonomous separations; therefore, these three are the most widely spread. These are the Church of the Nazarene, The Wesleyan Church, and the Free Methodist Church.
The Korean Methodist Church may deserve to be a fifth type of international church. I know they have member congregations in the United States that are fully integrated into their system of governance. I do not know what the relationships between the parent denomination and newly planted mission churches in other countries are like.
Now, some conclusions drawn by looking at the country-level data:
1. There is a wide range in terms of Wesleyan/Methodist denominational presence in particular countries, from a hundred or fewer members to a million or more members in one denomination in one particular country.
2. Countries with no Wesleyan Methodist presence are mostly Muslim and/or have a small population. This finding is not particularly surprising, as the difficulties in prompting Muslim conversions and the restrictions on religion in Muslim-majority countries are well-documented, and one might reasonably expect small population countries to be less able to support a variety of denominations.
3. Countries with a lot of Wesleyan/Methodist denominations are mostly former parts of the British or US empires. 80% of those countries with 5+ denominations present and all of those countries with 7-8 denominations present are former parts of the British or US empires. (The US empire was less extensive and less formal than the British Empire, but I’m including here the US Virgin Islands, Haiti, the Philippines, and Liberia, all of which were controlled at times by Americans or American settlers.) Again, given the extensive literature on the relationship between mission and empire, especially Protestant mission and the British Empire, this finding is not particularly surprising.
4. The Democratic Republic of Congo, Togo, and Mozambique stand out as particularly receptive to Wesleyan/Methodist denominations, despite lacking an Anglo-American colonial past. All three countries have 6 WMC member denominations. Cote d’Ivoire has 5 WMC member denominations and no Anglo-American colonialism, which is also notable. While all four countries have neighbors with British colonial pasts, more research into why these countries in particular have been receptive to Wesleyan/Methodist traditions would be welcome.
5. Despite the Wesleyan/Methodist movement’s roots in European Pietism and European Enlightenment thought, Europe is not terribly receptive to Wesleyan/Methodist denominations. Most European countries (other than the United Kingdom) have 1-3 WMC member denominations, and their memberships are small. Strong state churches, historic restrictions on religious freedom, and current secularization are all part of this story, but it is worth asking whether there are any other factors at play here.
6. The Wesleyan/Methodist movement is stronger in Latin America than Europe. In most Latin American countries, autonomous Methodist churches and the three holiness churches all have a presence. While many are small, membership is often higher than that in similarly-sized European countries. Latin America shares some cultural history with Europe. It, too, has had dominant state (Catholic) churches and historic religious restrictions. Given these similarities, the question then becomes, why has Wesleyanism/Methodism done better in Latin American than Europe?
7. Southeast Asia is one of the hot new mission fields for Wesleyan/Methodist work, attracting both UMC and holiness mission work. Thailand and Cambodia have new mission work from four denominations, Myanmar has new mission work from three denominations, and Vietnam, Laos, and Indonesia have all attracted two denominations in recent years. All of these new branches of Wesleyanism/Methodism are currently small but growing. More work needs to be done on why Southeast Asia has been such a focus for Wesleyan/Methodist growth in recent years.
Finally, it is worth noting that competition may or may not be good for Wesleyans/Methodists. According to Rodney Stark and Roger Finke, the presence of large numbers of denominations may provide options for religious consumers and/or indicate a de-regulated religious market. They argue that both these factors generally promote high levels of religious affiliation. Thus, competition may be good for membership. Nevertheless, competition also involves duplication of effort, confusion among members and potential converts, conflicts over access to resources, and a potential failure to embody the unity of Christ. Thus, while data shows where WMC member denominations are and are not located, it cannot determine whether these patterns of presence are ultimately good or bad.
Wednesday, February 21, 2018
Resource: Maps of locations of World Methodist Council denominations
Today's post is by UM & Global blogmaster Dr. David W. Scott, Director of Mission Theology 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.
As a research aid and an aid to thinking about the shape of the global Wesleyan/Methodist movement, I have compiled maps indicating the presence of member denominations of the World Methodist Council, the ecumenical body bringing together over 70 Methodist, Wesleyan, and related United/Uniting denominations. The WMC does not include all Methodist/Wesleyan denominations everywhere, but its members include the vast majority of Methodist/Wesleyan Christians.
Using information found on the WMC site, information on the sites of member denominations, and data from the World Christian Database, I compiled a list of all countries where one or more member denominations of the WMC have congregations. I also made a distinction between national denominations (those denominations with members and churches primarily in a single country) and international denominations (those denominations with members and churches in multiple countries, often on multiple continents).
Using that list, I generated a global map highlighting those countries with at least one WMC member denomination.
Here is a static version of that map.
Here is an interactive version of that map.
I also then generated a series of regional maps indicating which specific international denominations operated in particular countries, along with the presence of national autonomous and/or united/uniting denominations in each country.
Here is a .png file of the map for Africa.
Here is a .png file of the map for Asia.
Here is a .png file of the map for Central America and the Caribbean.
Here is a .png file of the map for Europe.
Here is a .png file of the map for North America.
Here is a .png file of the map for Oceania.
Here is a .png file of the map for South America.
Here is a PDF file with all seven regional maps.
There are a couple of caveats to the data and therefore the maps:
1. The data are not perfect. There’s no assurance these maps are 100% accurate or will stay that way for long. Denominations start work in new countries occasionally or have unofficial or unlicensed congregations that may not appear on the public lists.
2. It neglects Korean Methodist Church mission. I know the Korean Methodist Church conducts extensive mission work throughout the world, but I am unfamiliar with how this work is structured in terms of the ecclesial relationships between mission congregations and the Korean Methodist Church.
3. The maps only show presence, not relative membership levels in each country. These vary quite widely from the millions to the dozens. I know such data would be useful, and I may be able to produce it later, but to do so would require an extra challenge of data collection and map making.
4. It is surprisingly difficult to determine what should constitute a "country" for these maps. This difficulty arises not only because of instances of disputed sovereignty, but also because of a number of semi-autonomous relationships between territories and colonial governments. In the Caribbean, I have leaned toward a looser definition of country than elsewhere.
Readers are encouraged to draw their own insights and conclusions from these maps. I will present my insights and conclusions from these maps in a post later this week.
As a research aid and an aid to thinking about the shape of the global Wesleyan/Methodist movement, I have compiled maps indicating the presence of member denominations of the World Methodist Council, the ecumenical body bringing together over 70 Methodist, Wesleyan, and related United/Uniting denominations. The WMC does not include all Methodist/Wesleyan denominations everywhere, but its members include the vast majority of Methodist/Wesleyan Christians.
Using information found on the WMC site, information on the sites of member denominations, and data from the World Christian Database, I compiled a list of all countries where one or more member denominations of the WMC have congregations. I also made a distinction between national denominations (those denominations with members and churches primarily in a single country) and international denominations (those denominations with members and churches in multiple countries, often on multiple continents).
Using that list, I generated a global map highlighting those countries with at least one WMC member denomination.
Here is a static version of that map.
Here is an interactive version of that map.
I also then generated a series of regional maps indicating which specific international denominations operated in particular countries, along with the presence of national autonomous and/or united/uniting denominations in each country.
Here is a .png file of the map for Africa.
Here is a .png file of the map for Asia.
Here is a .png file of the map for Central America and the Caribbean.
Here is a .png file of the map for Europe.
Here is a .png file of the map for North America.
Here is a .png file of the map for Oceania.
Here is a .png file of the map for South America.
Here is a PDF file with all seven regional maps.
There are a couple of caveats to the data and therefore the maps:
1. The data are not perfect. There’s no assurance these maps are 100% accurate or will stay that way for long. Denominations start work in new countries occasionally or have unofficial or unlicensed congregations that may not appear on the public lists.
2. It neglects Korean Methodist Church mission. I know the Korean Methodist Church conducts extensive mission work throughout the world, but I am unfamiliar with how this work is structured in terms of the ecclesial relationships between mission congregations and the Korean Methodist Church.
3. The maps only show presence, not relative membership levels in each country. These vary quite widely from the millions to the dozens. I know such data would be useful, and I may be able to produce it later, but to do so would require an extra challenge of data collection and map making.
4. It is surprisingly difficult to determine what should constitute a "country" for these maps. This difficulty arises not only because of instances of disputed sovereignty, but also because of a number of semi-autonomous relationships between territories and colonial governments. In the Caribbean, I have leaned toward a looser definition of country than elsewhere.
Readers are encouraged to draw their own insights and conclusions from these maps. I will present my insights and conclusions from these maps in a post later this week.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)