Mainline or Methodist (Part 4)
In Chapter 4 of Dr. Scott Kisker’s work, Mainline or Methodist? Recovering our Evangelistic Mission, Kisker begins to discuss the “method” behind Methodism. This chapter opens with a critique of what passes for evangelism and discipleship within the UMC today. Kisker doesn’t hold back when he says most of what passes for evangelism in our denomination today,
[is] at best, a bankrupt vision of God’s purposes for creation and a truncated understanding of salvation. At worst, we find practices that are little more than thinly veiled attempts to manipulate others through politics or marketing techniques.
Our challenge is to reclaim the strong theological grounding of the early practices of the Methodist movement. Rather than trying anything to see if it works, or allowing our theology and practice to be grounded only in our personal preference or politics, we should follow Wesley’s practice of grounding our understanding of both evangelism and discipleship in the way, “God’s grace is active, working to save God’s beloved creatures.”
Kisker’s read of these practices follow Wesley’s admonition to preach Christ in all of his offices: prophet, priest, and king. The corresponding practices, are field preaching, class membership, and band membership. These also correspond to convincing (what we often call prevenient), justifying, and sanctifying grace. His summary at the end of the chapter is helpful,
With those asleep in sin, Methodism’s missional task is to minister in Christ’s prophetic office – publicly, in the open air, at the market cross – to convince people of their need for God. With those already convinced of their need for God, Methodism’s missional task is to introduce them to the one who can meet that need – to their great high priest. With those who know God’s forgiving love, Methodism’s missional task is to work to save them from the power of sin – bring every part of their lives into the love of Christ the king.
These theological and missional tasks were expressed in practices that many United Methodist congregations (and affiliated organizations) have given up: open air preaching, class meetings, and band meetings. Here is a basic description of those practices.
Open-air preaching: Wesley found places where real people gathered as part of their daily lives and introduced them to the message of God’s salvation. He preached outside the walls of the Church, many times as often as twice a day. He hoped to see people awakened to the, “hollowness of their search for happiness” in anything outside of God. Kisker challenges us to find the modern-day equivalent of the market square. In my D.Min. paper, I explore whether or not this is the virtual world of social media (Facebook, twitter, etc.), but we’ll leave that for another day. After being awakened by God’s grace through open-air preaching, people were gathered in the class meeting.
Class meeting: here, people were given opportunities for further response. People were invited to talk in smaller groups about their spiritual state and were expected to live as followers of Jesus. These groups were limited to twelve members where people experienced authentic Christian fellowship, often for the first time. Kisker cites Tom Albin’s research which showed, “the majority of experiences of the new birth happened after membership in the class meeting, at times in the meeting.” In a sense, people most often belonged before they believed. Kisker writes,
Perhaps it is not possible to recover the class meeting as it was for our present day. But if our ministry is to be effective in the present age, we must recover what they provided: small, disciplined, hospitable, caring fellowships for non-Christians and Christians alike.
In our day, I wonder if traditional Sunday school groups can fulfill this role. Kisker doesn’t seem to think so, but I think it’s possible.
Band meetings: finally, after being awakened by field preaching, incorporated into caring groups of discipline and community, early Methodists were joined in the band meeting. Band meetings were sepearted by gender and were more confessional in nature.
To be a part of a band meant being willing to shuck pretense, to be humble before a brother or sister in Christ. It meant acting as a priest one to another, acting in love toward another whose sin you know. It meant allowing someone, who knows your sin, to act in love toward you. It meant humility. It meant Christlikeness. It meant holiness.
People who participated in this methodical process often experienced “full salvation,” as they were empowered to experience healing, forgiveness, and participation in the work and ministry of Christ. At the church I serve, this can best happen through our COS group ministry. In fact, I’ve experienced this very thing with a small group of three other men that I meet with weekly. Through their encouragement, support, and accountability, I see how I’m growing in grace and loving God and neighbor more than I have in a very long time.
Together these practices, rooted in a strong Wesleyan theology, prevent us from being just a charity organization or a political rally that uses the Church and scripture to validate our own biases and preferences. They are a means God will use to form us as more passionate and dedicated followers of Jesus. In part 5, I’ll look at Kisker’s thoughts on where this conversation might lead in the United Methodist Church today.
Mainline or Methodist (Part 3)
More and more, I hear from young doctrine hungry Christians who turn to the young Reformed pastors in order to understand doctrine and theology. Unfortunately, many United Methodists seem to have abandoned the practice of teaching and preaching theology in compelling ways. Scott Kisker gives people from a Wesleyan background a strong place to begin recovering the practice of teaching a uniquely Methodist doctrine of salvation in Chapter 3.
In Kisker’s opening brief summary of the best Methodist preaching, he describes the content as “full salvation and the message of grace.” Our Wesleyan heritage, “offers us a model of salvation that is more than simply being born again, or being forgiven.” A Wesleyan approach agrees that forgiveness and being born again are essential parts of salvation. However, in the same way that there is more to marriage than the wedding (ht Kevin Watson), Wesleyans recognize there is more to salvation than the first moment of being reconciled to God.
Using the story of the prodigal son from Luke 15, Kisker details a Methodist understanding of God’s character and grace. For Kisker, the abundant love of the father in this story is key to understanding the love of God. Unlike the Reformed position that places God’s sovereignty as his primary attribute, Wesleyans have always understood God’s love as primary. This doesn’t deny God’s sovereignty, but suggests that God’s sovereignty is conditioned by God’s love.
Wesley puts it this way,
For what end did God create man? [The Westminster Assembly's] answer is, ‘To glorify and enjoy him forever.’ …Do the generality of common people understand that expression, ‘to glorify God?’ No, no more than they understand Greek…’He made you; and he made you to be happy in him; and nothing else can make you happy.’
Kisker then describes a position, not completely different than the Reformed position,
God created us to know, desire, and choose what will make us happy. And yet we don’t make the choice. There is something radically wrong with us. Wesley has no trouble talking about the ‘entire depravity’ of human beings in our ‘natural state.’ Left to our own devices we are completely hopeless, looking for love, looking for happiness, but only in the wrong places.
God’s grace is his loving response to this condition,
Without the assistance of God, we will never use our liberty in such a way that it leads us to real happiness, we will never understand or desire or choose what will make us happy. That assistance comes in the form of God’s love, which is grace.
Finally, Kisker does a terrific job describing preventing (his distinction between Wesley’s language of preventing and Outler’s language of prevenient is really helpful), convincing, justifying, and sanctifying grace. Preventing (or prevenient) grace allows us to respond to God in the first place, convicting and justifying grace are what are often described as being saved or being made right with God. Essential as these experiences are, there is an abundant life of grace after we receive grace and actively respond to God. This is sanctifying grace.
…the unmerited love of God desires not simply that we be welcomed back into the familiy, but that we be healed of all that led us into misery in the first place. [Salvation in a Wesleyan context] is the complete restoration of who we have been created to be, here and now, in this life.
Further,
It sanctifies us, makes us into saints, leads us into real, substantial happiness, not based on the externals of our circumstances, but on the unmerited love of God in Christ Jesus.
Perhaps the closing quote from John Wesley sums it up best,
Thus it is by manifesting himself, he destroys the works of the devil, restoring the guilty outcast from God to his favour, to pardon and peace; the sinner in whom dwelleth no good thing, to love and holiness; the burdened miserable sinner, to joy and unspeakable, to real, substantial happiness.
Methodism, at its best, also provided tools to engage people with God and help them experience this salvation. In chapter 4, Kisker will turn his attention to that subject.
Methodist Must Read
If you are a United Methodist, you really need to read this article by Dr. Donald W. Haynes. (h/t Andrew Thompson)
Amazing Rescue in Haiti
If you haven’t seen this yet, watch the young boy’s response at the first of the video.
The rest of the video shows the ongoing need. If you’d like to make a donation that will send 100% of your donation to relief, please click here. UMCOR’s administrative costs are covered outside of your donations, so you can make a real difference with your donation.
Mainline or Methodist (Part 2)
In chapter 2, Dr. Scott Kisker describes the vision to which John Wesley and early Methodists committed their lives. He suggests that Wesley and Methodism’s theology and methodology only make sense in light of this larger vision. Kisker describes that vision as follows,
This vision is the possibility of present salvation from the tyranny of sin – from the dominion of the devil. It is a vision of life lived under the authority of God, who brings “liberty to the captives” (Is 61:1). It is St. Peter’s vision of a “royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s own people” (1 Pet 2:9), living in accord with God’s will, as a visible testimony to resurrection power. The “beauty of holiness” (1 Chr 16:29) had seduced Wesley long before his Aldersgate experience. That pursuit became his calling.
In spite of his own efforts, Wesley could never attain the salvation or holiness he so desired. It wasn’t until his encounter with God at Aldersgate that he recognized, “holiness, saintliness, victory over sin, resurrection, the kingdom of God is a gift. We can do nothing to deserve it. We cannot achieve it…[but] we can and must receive it by faith.” Wesley experienced the “new birth,” or being “born again,” at Aldersgate and yet he knew that birth was just the beginning. Kisker writes, “The new birth was not the fullest possible expression of holiness in this life. It was a birth. It was not the goal of Christianity, it was the doorway to it, and there was a lot of house left to explore.”
The often neglected Methodist doctrine of perfection is the goal of the Christian life. Again, Kisker helpfully and briefly explains this, “Perfection, completeness, is the greatest manifestation of the love of God filling us that is possible in this life.” Overall, Kisker explains, t was Wesley’s vision of holiness that stood behind the mission of Methodism. In fact, the very reason given for raising up Methodist preachers in the first place as, “to reform the nation, particularly the Church; and to spread scriptural holiness over the land.”
How long has it been since you’ve heard this vision within United Methodism? When was the last time you taught about the “new birth” in plain language? How are we called to pick us this original vision in our churches today?
Kisker suggests that Methodists in America lost sight of this vision and the structures (small groups, band and class meetings) that sought to allow men and women to experience the “new birth” and scriptural holiness. In fact, he goes on to describe the general lack of expectation he sees in UM congregations around the nation,
As I go around and attend United Methodist churches, what strikes me is the way in which most of them (not all) are limited by what passes for possible in this world. United Methodists do not expect God’s Spirit to intervene in powerful ways – to win the battle for us. As a result, we are resigned to the way things are. The logic of limited possibilities has seduced us. Perhaps this is because we are so comfortable with the way things are.”
However, Kisker suggests that if we catch John Wesley’s vision, the language of salvation and the practices of Methodism will once again make sense and lead us to radically embracing God’s vision for salvation and holiness in our world today.
Mainline or Methodist (Part 1)
For Christmas I received a copy of Dr. Scott Kisker’s book, Mainline or Methodist: Recovering our Evangelistic Mission. After a quick read through, I saw that it was worth a second, more thorough read. I also decided it would be a worthwhile way to start the new year here on the blog. Rather than giving a long review of the book as a whole, I thought I’d work through each chapter and share some of the ideas that really made me think.
First, Kisker acknowledges the systematic “sickness” of United Methodism, even though he refuses to make the numerical decline since 1960 his primary concern. In Kisker’s argument, United Methodism’s problems started long before the decline beginning in the 60s. He suggests, “the decline of Methodism began decades before the denomination experienced any numerical losses.”
For us in so-called mainline Methodism, our “mainline” identity is killing us and we must surgically remove it if we are ever to regain our health. When we became “mainline,” we stopped actually being Methodist in all but name. Real Methodism declined because we replaced those peculiarities that made us Methodist with a bland, acceptable, almost civil religion, barely distinguishable from other traditions also known as “mainline.”
“Mainline” means little to nothing. Kisker uses the example of both Hillary Clinton and George W. Bush belonging to the UMC as evidence that, “United Methodism has become simply a reflection of the middle and upper middle class world around it,” instead of the amazing movement of God captured when the Wesley brothers were, “an embarrassment to the Anglican communion and mainline society.”
This is easily seen in the 19-20th century practice of Methodists hoping to influence society,
We even began to assume we deserved to determine the shape of American society, not through conversion, a process of repentance and new birth, but through the political process and our own lobby, located in a fine white building across the street from the U.S. Capitol.
Kisker then describes the movement we see in John Wesley’s life from respectable member of the Academy and elite Anglicanism to tireless evangelist to the common people. This is epitomized by Wesley’s field preaching, taking the gospel outside of his comfort zone into the industrial working class quarters of society. Wesley previously shared an aversion to this new model for sharing the gospel,
“I left London and in the evening expounded to a small company at Basingstoke, Saturday, 31. In the evening I reached Bristol and met Mr. Whitefield there. I could scarcely reconcile myself at first to this strange way of preaching in the fields, of which he set me an example on Sunday; I had been all my life (till very lately) so tenacious of every point relating to decency and order that I should have thought the saving of souls almost a sin if it had not been done in a church.”
Four days later, John Wesley began sharing the message of Christ in the same way,
At four in the afternoon, I submitted to be more vile and proclaimed in the highways the glad tidings of salvation, speaking from a little eminence in a ground adjoining to the city, to about three thousand people.
Instead of following Wesley’s lead, Kisker suggests we may well resemble more the Anglicans Wesley hoped to revive than our own Methodist founder,
We are educated well beyond the majority in our society. We pay our clergy, as distinctly mainline, beyond the majority in our society. If we are to recover Methodism, freed from its addiction to the American mainstream, it will require the kind of conversion Wesley experienced that day in Bristol…For such a recovery, we must humble ourselves before almighty God, trust in the sacrifice and resurrection of Jesus Christ, and expect a blessing through a miraculous anointing by the Holy Spirit.
Over the next few posts, I’ll look at Kisker’s suggestions about the way forward.
Gen-X Rising on Mark Driscoll
Read this article on Mark Driscoll by Andrew Thompson over at Gen-X Rising. I agree with Andrew’s assessment of the implications of Mark Driscoll (and other young Calvinist preachers like Matt Chandler) for those of us who are Methodists.
If you are a Methodist, all this has some implications. First, stop worrying about the mind numbingly mundane “church programming” approach to to Christian discipleship and start getting serious about salvation. Read the Bible (everyday) and pick up a collection of Wesley’s sermons… Realize that the culture has infected the church to a degree that we need an exorcism. But realize, also, that Driscoll’s Calvinism isn’t the answer…
It’s high time that Wesleyans got serious about the gospel God raised us up to preach. We’ve been playing at dolls far too long.
Amen Andrew, Amen.
Open Call for God-Called Preachers
My two oldest kids stayed overnight with my mother back in southeastern Oklahoma, so I drove down and picked them up in Henryetta today. On the way back to Oklahoma City, I decided to take a different route. We ventured through downtown and made a stop by an older United Methodist Church off the beaten path, several streets north and west of downtown. As I pulled alongside the church my four year old said, “Wow, it’s dirty.” I said, “why do you think it’s dirty,” and my seven year old daughter said, “because they don’t take good care of it.” I then told them that any church that stops reaching out and bringing people to Christ ends up in even worse condition. At the same time, across the street, I saw two young men. They were dressed in white shirts, black ties, and backpacks and were walking from door to door in the older neighborhood around the church. I pointed them out and said, “They don’t believe the same thing we do, but they are out telling people what they believe.” I then told them how our church would look just like this one if we stopped inviting people to our church to come to know Jesus.
After getting home, I looked up this church online and found the typical non-webpages listing the congregation’s name. However, I also found a defunct website on the Oklahoma City Cooperative Urban parish. Here is an excerpt from that website (I’ve changed the name, because I’m not writing this to embarrass anyone and I think it’s common for many of our congregations regardless of the name),
In 1969 on a typical Sunday morning 365 people gathered for worship in the beautiful Gothic sanctuary at ____________ United Methodist in Oklahoma City. “On Easter, every pew was packed, even in the balcony, and we brought extra chairs in,” recalls a retired United Methodist pastor who was then pastor at ________.
“Our educational building was less than ten years old, and we needed every room in it,” __________ says. Average Sunday school attendance was 368. The church had 206 children from birth through the sixth grade and 184 youth.
Compare this with its current situation at the time,
On a typical Sunday last year, 85 gathered at __________ for worship. Seventy came to Sunday school. The church had 15 children from birth through the sixth grade and three youth.
The neighborhoods weren’t empty, people just moved and stopped commuting back to attend on Sundays. For whatever reason, the church stopped reaching out to their local neighborhood (or any other neighborhood for that matter). So what was our ingenious solution to this dramatic shift? We formed a cooperative urban parish whose purpose statement read,
The Oklahoma City Cooperative Urban Parish is composed of churches and organizations who have a common heritage in the Christian faith; are located in a common geographical area; share common commitment to effective ministry with persons in their congregations and the surrounding community. The members of the Parish covenant to identify resources, establish goals, and develop ministry strategies designed to achieve those goals. In no way does the Parish compromise the integrity of member institutions, but through cooperation strengthens the ministry of each
While I’m sure this doesn’t completely encompass their vision for these congregations, I can’t help but notice Jesus Christ is not mentioned anywhere here other than in their “common heritage in the Christian faith.” In fact, the article said the goals of the urban parish could be summed up with our denomination’s campaign, “Open hearts, open minds, open doors.” I also can’t help but notice how uninspired this makes me.
It just so happens we’re approximately ten years removed from what the date of this article. Yes, this means we can judge the effects of this particular approach to revitalizing a series of churches. According to the most recent conference journal, this congregation averaged just over 60 people in worship during 2008. That’s right, down 25 in worship from the time of the intervention.
While I was parked in front of this old building, I took a picture with my phone and sent it to a friend of mine who is beginning to more fully grasp and develop his understanding of God’s call on his life. All I did was take a picture of the exterior, and send him a note with the word, “Calling” in the subject line. His reply? “This made me tear up, let’s do it!”
We have young women and men in our conference who have a deep-seated Spirit-filled longing to lead congregations like this to revitalized ministry for Jesus Christ, empowered by the Holy Spirit, for the glory of God the Father. We have young men and women who are tired of campaigns, sick of non-descript goals and efforts, and dying to be used by God to share the Gospel. My 95 year old Grannie once called these “God-called preachers,” and I’m praying their tribe will increase and be invited to lead. Let’s stop wasting time adding pages to the Book of Resolutions that no one will ever read, and begin to share the gospel of Jesus Christ. Who knows what ten years of that might accomplish?
Mission Trumps Tradition
In case you don’t know, I really like Dan Kimball. Why? Because I think he does his very best to connect with the people in his community who don’t know Jesus Christ. I think he carries a sense of urgency about sharing the gospel that we need to reclaim across the Church. I also think he properly understands sharing the faith with our community as an essential piece of our overall mission as followers of Christ. Take time to watch his presentation from the Nines (FYI: I have an HP laptop and a Mac, so I’m like Switzerland in that debate), and see what I’m talking about.
The Simple Life
I just finished reading, The Simple Life: Time, Relationships, Money, God by Thom S. and Art Rainer. You may know Thom from books like Simple Church: Returning to God’s Process for Making Disciples and Essential Church?: Reclaiming a Generation of Dropouts.
Based on a survey of 1,077 individuals, Thom and Art saw that an overwhelming number of people from all walks of life said they need greater simplicity in their lives in order to be more fulfilled. Specifically, they wanted more simplicity in the areas of time, relationships, money, and God.
So, in a nutshell, the authors applied the concepts from Simple Church to these four areas. These concepts are:
- Clarity: knowing where you’re going
- Movement: intentional, incremental steps
- Alignment: making sure your life lines up with your goals
- Focus: eliminating things outside of your goals, even if they are good things.
For whatever reason, it wasn’t simple for me to read this book. I think after I saw the basic concepts, I pretty much knew where everything was heading. Basically, the idea of the book is applying the concepts of clarity, movement, alignment, and focus to one’s personal life. So, no big surprises here.
As a pastor, I think focus is the hardest thing for me. It’s easy, for the most part, to say no to bad things. It’s difficult when you have to choose between two, or more, good things. A little clarity and alignment goes a long way in making those decisions in our lives.
So, in the end, cool cover, good ideas, borrow a copy from a friend or read Simple Church and apply those ideas to your life. However, if you’re a layperson who doesn’t want to read Simple Church, then Simple Life might be just what you’re looking for.
