We are called Methodists for a reason
Wednesday, January 31, 2007
Perhaps my column in the Reporter this week is too strongly worded. But I don't think so.
All the so-called "experts" say that denominationalism is dead. They say that people don't want to identify with a denomination anymore. They say that denominations will be much better off pretending like they aren't denominations anymore.
I dismiss all of that "expert" opinion. Every bit of it.
We are part of a story - a history and a tradition that makes us who we are. As I have been reminded myself lately, we don't get to choose our own story. We are born into it, shaped by it, and we find our identities in it.
Our story is the story of Methodism. It is the story of a people who arose out of a response to an extraordinary call of the Holy Spirit. As I write in my column, "Originally intended as an epithet, the name [Methodist] came to be associated with a people who shunned religious pretension, practiced a rigorous discipleship, sought furiously after the way of salvation and relentlessly carried the gospel to the poor and lost."
Frankly, that's not an identity I particularly want to lose, anyway. Our recovery as a church - and by that I mean The United Methodist Church - will only come when we stop trying to follow what the culture identifies as the latest trend and start practicing the kind of discipleship that John Wesley instilled in his early followers.
Don't get me wrong. Christ ultimately desires unity for his church. And I think that is both a physical and a spiritual unity - one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church. But that unity is not achieved by forsaking the distinctiveness of our tradition in favor of a bland, happy-go-lucky megachurch. Such a model only serves to imitate the surrounding pagan culture dressed up in religious language.
If we Methodists started acting like the Methodists of 1742, 1784, or 1824, it would be scary what the Holy Spirit could accomplish through us. That calling has never left us. Who will answer it in this day and age?
posted by Andrew C. Thompson at 5:50 PM
7 Comments:
I fully agree. The Methodist movement succeeding on powerful revivals that were met with calls to discipleship lived out in small groups intentional on living out the Gospel. I once read (not sure if it's true) that the decline of the the Methodist church began when most conferences quit mandating that church members also be members of a class meeting. Interesting nonetheless.
I think that our history and tradition (and our very story) is unknown to most of the people sitting in our pews. This leads to the very serious misperception that all denominations are alike, or that denominational difference doesn't really matter...or denominationalism is dead.
There are some important ways that we can go forward and be innovative with ministry while still being true to our Wesleyan roots. Heck, there are some days I think that going back to Wesley would be a huge step forward!
Melissa -
The notion that our story is unknown to our own people is a frightening one. A friend of mine once said to me, "If you want to really know someone, you have to know his story." On very fundatmental level, that is as true of the church as it is of individuals.
Identity is wrapped up in the story of where we came from. That tells us who we are and who we can (and should) be. Without that, we suffer from a permanent form of amnesia.
I actually wrote a U.M. Reporter column about this a few months back. If you or anyone else is interested, it is located at:
http://www.reporterinteractive.org/main/Feeds/tabid/116/newsid/1344/Default.aspx
I can say that I offered a class on Wesley and Methodism at the church I was serving a few years ago, and like the pastor I mention in the column, the response was overwhelming.
Is the distinctiveness of Methodism always necessarily lost on the megachurch? Is it possible for the megachurch to instill communities in such a way that the mentality of small groups is still present and able to convey grace?
That's a fair comment that was left by 'anonymous.' No, there is probably nothing inherent in the size of a congregation that determines whether or not discipleship can be embodied in an authentic way.
The trend in American Protestantism that is so disconcerting to me is its consumer quality - the notion that you can sample from the spiritual smorgasbord and thus live out your discipleship. But that makes religion about 'me,' just like everything else in our culture. The reason I tend to pick on megachurches is that they seem to be particularly prone to this approach, i.e., offering a huge variety of programs, worship styles, etc., and encouraging their members to sample at will. That doesn't make for transformed disciples; it only perpetuates sin by giving it a spiritual legitimation.
Andrew, I read your article in the UM Reporter and was compelled to come here and give you some feedback. I think you did an excellent job of pointing out what seems glaringly obvious to me and many others, but seems lost on so many.
You hit the nail on the head when you said "we are losing members because we practice a luke-warm faith". If there is any way to revive Methodism I believe it will be with a renewed committment teach, preach, and spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Sadly from my limited vantage point I see the UMC moving in just the oposite direction.
Lee -
We may well be moving in the opposition direction. If so, I think there are two primary reasons why:
First, our level of wealth. Affluence and discipleship simply do not go very well together most of the time (I seem to remember Jesus saying something about a rich man and the eye of a needle. Hmmm...). The richer people get, the less inclined they are to depend on God, and thus, to commit themselves in service on God's behalf. That's a huge problem for an American Protestant denomination like the UMC.
Second, there is a deeply serious lack of understanding about our history and tradition. People don't like denominational labels because they don't understand them. They want Christians to "just get along," so they tend to dismiss denominational distinctiveness out of hand. But that kind of attitude ignores the truly important aspect of identity - aspects that are not necessarily negatives. The word here is "ecclesiology," and the United Methodist tradition is sorely lacking in a good conception of its own. For Methodist people today to see past the fog of their own affluence, they are going to have to become better acquainted with who they are and where they came from.
Post a Comment
<< Home