This article made me think about inclusivity. How inclusive do we really want to be? Even the most ardent supporters of Open Hearts, Open Minds, Open Doors sometimes hesitate when faced with including those from a different theological perspective.
Author: Matt
I Am Keith McIlwain…
![]() |
You scored as Keith McIlwain. You are Keith McIlwain! You abhor all violence, except the savagery of the gridiron.
Which Methoblogger Are You? |
So I don’t do quizzes all that much, but this one caught my eye. Turns out I’m a tie between Keith and Abi. I’ve read Abi’s blog for some time, but haven’t read Keith’s regularly for whatever reason. However, since I am Keith, I thought I should drop by and add him to my Google Reader. Great stuff over there if I do say so myself (of course, the rest of the MethoBloggers on here fun and interesting to read as well). Maybe I should buy a tie-dyed shirt…
Adam Hamilton’s Financial Transparency
While I don’t know the circumstances surrounding this email (posted on the Church of the Resurrection web-site), I very much appreciate Adam Hamilton’s financial transparency. You might find it interesting and encouraging as well.
I continue to appreciate how Church of the Resurrection continues to be distinctly United Methodist as they reach out to “non and nominally religious people.” Get that? I’m not even a member of their Church, and I can tell you part of their mission and vision. How’s that for a mission statement?!
While I’m talking about COR, take a minute to visit Andrew Conard’s blog to read the thoughts of one of their pastors. He’s got some interesting thoughts on a variety of topics.
John Wesley’s Doppleganger

Have you heard the news? They are making a film about John Wesley’s life. The good news is they’ve found an actor that bears an uncanny resemblance to John. The bad news is that this actor is Paul Reubens of PeeWee Herman fame. Ok, ok…I’m joking! But seriously, have you ever noticed the uncanny resemblance between the two? If Paul can do an English accent, I think we’re well on the way to seeing the ocean passage to Georgia on the big screen!
Borg & Crossan’s Understanding of Truth
I’ve been reading Marcus J. Borg & John Dominic Crossan’s book Last Week: A Day-by-Day Account of Jesus’s Final Week in Jerusalem. For those of you who know me, you may find this very surprising considering the things I’ve had to say about these two over the years. In some ways, I’ve been pleasantly surprised. Their description of Mark’s gospel and Jesus’s confrontation with the domination system of Rome is excellent and well worth reading. However, as I entered the final chapter on Easter, I was very intrigued by their understanding of history and truth.
So one should not think of history as “true” and parable as “fiction” (and therefore not nearly as important). Only since the Enlightenment of the seventeenth century have many people thought this way, for in the Enlightenment Western culture began to identify truth with “factuality.” Indeed, this identification is one of the central characteristics of modern Western culture.
…but parable, independently of historical factuality can be profoundly true. Indeed, it may be that the most important truths can be expressed only in parable (p. 194).
These statements come in the description of Jesus’ resurrection as a parable. They hesitate to say whether or not the event of Jesus’ resurrection is historically factual, but from other statements I would highly doubt they would hold to this.
Now, I understand a relational account of epistemology and truth. As a former scientist of sorts, I can appreciate the idea that knowledge and truth are more than cold hard facts isolated in a test tube. In fact, I even feel that I operate in a fairly postmodern paradigm in this regard.
However, I still have enough modern rationalist left inside to hold the questions I asked in an earlier post on truth. So again I ask, would you go to a physician who held the same view of truth as Borg and Crossan? “I’m sorry ma’am, but frankly, truth is more than connection with factuality, and I don’t ‘feel’ like you have cancer in spite of what the tests show. You’re free to go home!” Am I saying you can verify the resurrection scientifically? No, but I really don’t believe you can dismiss its historical reality and still believe it’s “true.”
Addendum: OK, I think I know one of the things that bothers me about Borg and Crossan. It seems that they have been influenced by the notion that certain things outside the realm of our modern rational understanding cannot occur in a literal sense (i.e. resurrection). So they start out of modernity, then shift into a postmodern conception of truth in order to somehow cling to the Christian doctrine of resurrection. Modern skepticism leading to postmodern acceptance on other grounds. It seems that if they were operating more consistently out of a postmodern paradigm, they would not deny the resurrection in the first place. They want to speak relevantly, it seems, to a modern world that cannot accept things like miracles, resurrection, etc., yet use a postmodern paradigm to speak to that world about the “reality” of resurrection. It seems like they want to have their epistemological cake and eat it too.
Into the Heart of Darkness: AKA Children’s Soccer
Just this morning, my wife called looking into a local soccer league for our four year old daughter. Not long ago, I found that I am a newly minted soccer coach, holding the athletic futures of five 4 & 5 year old girls in my hands. We live in a part of Oklahoma where soccer takes a backseat to T-ball and Little League, so I’ve never coached, played, or really even watched soccer. Fortunately, this must be common because there is a new coach training where we figure out the ins and outs of the game. So, for the next few weeks I’ll be trading my theology books and commentaries for “Beginning Soccer,” “Psychodynamics of Soccer-Moms,” and “Winning Strategies for Four Year Old Girls Soccer!”
Now for the hard part, what will we name our team? Based on the demographics, I have jokingly suggested My Little Soccer Ponies. Of course our colors will be pink and purple. All kidding aside, we go to sign paperwork, pick out uniforms, and get our player list tomorrow. I’m actually very excited.
1,000 Visitors…Wow
Itinerancy and the “Smoke Filled Room”
Sometimes we picture the Bishop meeting with the cabinet in a dimly lit smoke filled room. There’s a circular table in the middle covered with green felt and ashtrays. All of the superintendents are gathered around with yellow notebooks full of comments about their pastors, and the bishop is sitting in a leather wing-backed chair in the corner. He or she only leans forward into the light to make the final say if there becomes a dispute over appointments. After months of wrangling and back-room deals, they emerge from this room, dust themselves off, and make calls to the poor little itinerant ministers who tremble as they wait to hear the call from on high.
Now, hopefully none of us truly believe that’s how the process works. In fact, I need to preface my comments by saying I’ve only been appointed one time thus far, and my appointment has been a better fit than anyone could have conceived without being guided by the very Spirit of God. I’m not saying this because one of my higher-ups might happen to read this; I’m saying it because it has simply been true. You see, I asked to be close to my aging parents, and ended up forty-five minutes away from them. This is in a conference where I could have just as easily been five hours from them. My father died in October after I was appointed in June. Because of the cabinet, I was able to spend more time with him during the last five months of his life than I had in ten years before. Our bishop and cabinet have my confidence and trust because of this.
However, that is not the case for some ministers and congregations. I believe this is because the process seems so mysterious to those who are on the outside trying to look in. That’s why weird fantasized pictures about what happens behind closed doors sometimes exist. I know many of you have suggested that itinerancy is broken and needs to be addressed at General Conference. I grew up in a Church with a congregational polity and a “call” system., and there’s no way that’s the solution (Of course, I know that’s not what most of you are suggesting). I believe in the itinerancy, and I believe in God’s desire to use our denomination to make faithful disciples. That’s why I’m United Methodist. I believe the more open, clear, transparent conversation we can have about the process the better. I also believe we can tweak the system to account for current trends and dynamics (for instance, in his book, Pastor, Willimon suggests the sixth year is one of the more effective years of ministry for many congregations). In general, I would still hate to see the itinerancy go the way of the dodo. So what would a modified appointment system look like?
A Father’s Tribute
I wrote this poem a little over two years ago for my daughter that just turned four in October. Poetry is nearly impossible to format the way I’d like on this blog, but here it is:
Ancient-future faith – a continuous line
Future expectations – our daughter in time
Born on this day – the Feast of Saint Francis
A precious two years – caught up in dances
Water and Spirit – drenched in the Name
Forged in the fire – of the cross and the flame
Family tradition – we thank God every night
You look at stars – and see God just right
Angels captivate you – can you still see
The God who surrounds – and forever will be
A promise to watch – a promise to share
The faith of forever – the One who is there
Divisions, Divisions, Divisions…
Our district’s nominating committee recently met and contacted each pastor with their committee assignments for 2007. These announcements have me thinking about the committee divisions we have in the United Methodist Church. No, I’m not talking about the old liberal-conservative divide (I am of the mind that these labels becoming increasingly useless); I’m talking about the division between Discipleship, Church Development, Evangelism, and Mission. I’m not exactly sure where these particular divisions came from, but I am sure they are fairly false distinctions. Is mission to be separated from evangelism? Is discipleship something distinct from being involved in mission? Is development of the church something that happens when removed from evangelism, mission, and discipleship?
For the most part, I tend to sit back and observe the overarching structure of Methodism. I really don’t have much influence in these areas, and don’t want to complain for complaining’s sake. However, I do think it would streamline our committees if we would think about things holistically instead of dividing everything up along what I believe are false distinctions.
Think about this. A true missions committee would spearhead initiatives locally and globally. They would be involved in everything from evangelism and social work (once again a dubious distinction) on the local level to short-term and long-term mission work on a regional and global level. Church development would be integrated into the local mission work, seeking to establish new church plants and working to help local churches embody the missio Dei locally. Somehow, the Committee on Discipleship would need to be the umbrella under which all of these committees functioned, because we’re called to make disciples of Jesus Christ, right? Discipleship isn’t just bible study and small groups. It is the holistic development of authentic apprentices of Jesus. It’s calling and leading women and men to follow Jesus in all aspects of their lives. Discipleship is growing in the love of God and neighbor, and if that doesn’t involve the overarching mission of the Church, then I don’t know what does.
Do I have a solution? No. Do I want us to start talking about these things? Yes.

