The Mission Has a Church

Hirsch has some great insight into the impact of missional thinking for church and denomination. What does this mean for denomaintions doing reogranization/restructing? Where is our theology impacting, and in fact guiding, our reorganizaiton? What

Here are a few quotes for your consideration:

Regarding a missions/missionary approach-- "What is going to sound like Good News for this people group?" "What is church for this people group?" At this point, I'm curious what the varied contexts mean for the UMC. How much room do we give for these missional questions, especially for church starting, and how do we oversee that in an international denomination. KISS comes to mind regarding the Book of Discipline and the mandates at the highest levels allowing for context specific expressions of United Methodist Christianity.

My ongoing curiousity-- What is our shared theology of Chruch that is informing the UMC reorganization? Missional language and thinking is helfpul to me in the process of the renewal of a local congregation and an international denomination.

Hirsch quotes from the video:

Church "evicted missiology out of the equation."

"God is a missionary God."

"Mission isn't a subset of ecclesiology, but a subset of theology."

"It is part of the doctrine of God, not the doctrine of Church."

The key it to let "missiology determine ecclesiology."

"The mission has a church!"

"It is a fundamental paradigm shift."

Necessity of "unlearning" how to do church.

The "biggest hindrance is unlinking our imaginagations from the Constantinian mold of church."

"To borrow from Einstein: the problems of the church can not be resolved by the same type of thinking that created them in the first place."

The conversation returned to the immediate context of sharing the Gospel or starting a church. Numerous biblical stories come to my mind from the New Testament when I think about this.

As I continue to think and pray toward General Conference 2012 I hope that these sorts of primary theolgoical and biblical conversations will also be part of our reorganizaiton and renewal!

Check out the full video for yourself at Hirsch video interview .

Key Characteristics of the Chrysler Reorganization

I just caught some of a 60 Minutes story on Sergio Marchionne, CEO of Fiat-Chrysler, and was intrigued with his approach and early success with their reorganization. I'm a little envious of the business world, so different than the church in terms of the bottom line & how quickly they can move in leadership, yet there may be some elements similar in any reorganization.

I found a good article about the Marchionne Strategy.I'm lifting out a number of quotes as it's also a nice look at some major issues in a strategy for reorganization. Much of the material is based on Wall Street Journal's Jennifer Clark intriguing book "Mondo Agnelli: Fiat, Chrysler, and the Power of a Dynasty." With many denominations and churches considering how to be efficient in this generation and with the new world economy it is interesting to consider how other large institutions have reorganized.

"With his lightning-quick mind, boundless energy, and utter self-confidence, he took over the company, selected a management team, created a product plan, and established a set of performance targets." Now I'm thinking about a church and denomination. Wouldn't it be nice sometimes to have that sort of authority and ability as a CEO?! So, it doesn't all transfer, but some of these characteristics sound good for a clergy profile. Do we know what we are looking for in a management team? What is our "product plan?" What are the performance targets? I think that some of the UMC discussions at General Conference and in Annual Conferences are addressing some of these matters.

"He selected his own management team after months of walking around at the company, looking for energetic risk-takers and evaluating them on the spot. After picking his team, he sent 2,000 of his rejects off to early retirement." Are energetic risk takers valued in a congregation or denomination? What do we do with such folk? Do we know our clergy in a denomination well enough to be able to evaluate them?

"...Marchionne's next step was to put all of his executives together in one room to come up with a business plan. Having wiped out several layers of management, he now eliminated time-killing committees..." Got bureaucracy in your church or denomination?! Got any time killing committees? What would happen if we eliminated those meetings?

He also consolidated leadership, rather than running separate business units, as "The idea was to make Fiat quicker and more efficient by getting all parts of the company to talk to one another." Note speed/responsiveness, efficiency, and communication as a key organizational value.

"Just as deadly was Fiat's practice of putting car development entirely in the hands of engineers. When the engineers were done, they would throw the car "over the wall" to sales and marketing teams with instructions on how many to sell and at what price, Clark notes. It was a process that was guaranteed to be inefficient and to create disputes between different parts of the company." Is the work in the right hands?! What practices are inefficient, or by design create misunderstanding/controversy/friction?

"After one manager patted himself on the back for turning a big loss into a smaller one, Marchionne went after him. 'I don't need people in here who are happy to lose money,' Clark quotes him as saying. 'I want people who culturally are all about making money. You are free to go.'" Hmmm, what should the church be "all about?"

Of Marchionne it is said, "Perhaps his most defining characteristic is his unwillingness to sugarcoat reality." Who does this in a church or denomination? How do we best do supervision and accountability that tells the truth?

Now compare the various UMC reorganization plans. The IOT/CT plan, if adopted, would need to be wisely implemented and the very best personnel would need to be in those few crucial positions. It is a bold move, but then isn't that what we need?

Could ReThink Annual Conference Lead to ReThink Charge Conference?!

I've been away from the blog of late with mission trips, catch up work, & then something flu like knocking me out of everything.

I noticed my old seminary friend, Taylor Watson Burton-Edwards, offers up another insightful and practical suggestion with ReThink Annual Conference.

Plenty of us have talked about this over the years. Many vote with partial attendance, or most correctly stated, lots of attendance in hallway meetings. After you attend AC one year you'll notice a deadly redundancy with a few cosmetic changes.

Check out ReThink Annual Conference and imagine the vibrant new Methodist realities that might take form instead of a repeat of a dead, institutional form of religious business that really isn't fitting for a Methodist movement. I think Taylor is on to a conversation which every conference should engage in and look to implement in some form as we revitalize the connection and reignite a movement.

This might even lead to ReThink Charge Conference!

Accountability Booster or Doomsday Device?

I've enjoyed The Office for a number of years. This season it's as strong as ever with a good edge to it and clever situations. Last night's episode was called "Doomsday." Robert California, the new CEO, expects the group to make fewer mistakes. Dwight creates a software program that will identify if the team makes 5 mistakes on the paper orders or accounting. If you know anything about the characters in that office you know this is inevitable! Once they make the 5 mistakes Dwight has an e-mail automatically sent to the corporate office at 5PM. The group calls it a Doomsday Device while Dwight consistently calls it an accountability booster.

So, which is it...accountability booster or doomsday device?

Seeking Church Planting Catalyst

Background Data for Mission is one of my favorite bits of UMC information as they share great ideas based in research and best practices. Today I received the October 2011 Volume 23, No. 10 issue of BDM and offer the whole e-mail below. OK, it also shows one of the coolest jobs I've heard about in some time.


Two that Do, Part II

Last month we looked at two churches which are reaching more people, younger people, and more diverse people. This month will continue this theme, mainly due to unanticipated worship experiences of the editor over the weekend. Three Sunday services were attended. The first was a small urban UMC which is not doing particularly well at any of the three foci just mentioned for reaching people.

Second on the list was a visit to one of those churches mentioned last month, the Brooklyn Tabernacle. Unlike the previous visit to this church, which was the Tuesday night prayer meeting, this was the Sunday noon service. The attendance filled the sanctuary so that closed circuit was used into an overflow room across the street. (Estimated attendance at this service, which is one of three: 3,000) No printed order of service was to be had, though the bulletin was a glossy, full color tri-fold. Worship singing with overhead projection took the first 45 minutes. Then the centerpiece of the service shared two numbers: the Brooklyn Tabernacle Choir. The power of this presentation reminds the attender why this choir has earned six Grammies. Superlatives fail me. The choir also did the offertory. A key take-away here is that high quality music matters. This poses a challenge for vast majority of United Methodist churches, since they are small and thus have limited resources. Hopefully they can find the means to enhance their music.

After the offertory and some announcements, the preacher came on stage. The style was as described last month. He was very engaging and the attenders responded. It’s interesting to note that in all UMC emphasis on congregational transformation and vitality, little emphasis is given to preaching. Yet few strong dynamic churches got there with weak preaching.

Church number three was Redeemer Presbyterian. This ministry is a unique urban ministry in Manhattan, which has reached mega-church status (5,000 in worship) after being a new start in the late 80’s, yet which does not have its own worship space still. There are no obvious intentions of doing so either. They meet in two locations in the morning and three in the late afternoon and evening. A morning and evening service is held in the Hunter college auditorium. Worship styles vary and include classical, contemporary and jazz. I attended a jazz service in the late afternoon hosted in a Baptist church. The vast majority in attendance were twenty somethings who were highly diverse ethnically. The place was packed. The five piece, accomplished, jazz band played prelude music and provided accompaniment for all singing. The service style was blended with a highly detailed bulletin with the order of service and all music printed. Again, the excellence of the music was a defining and highly attractive feature of the service.

Senior pastor, Tim Keller preached. This is not insignificant insofar as he is not present at all services and the church does not announce where he will be on a given Sunday. The sermon style was very different than the Brooklyn Tabernacle. There was little animation and the content was heavily philosophical with a strong element of apologetics. Nevertheless, the presentation was certainly compelling in its own right. This seems to be a fine match for those assembled. Again it is clear that the preaching has played a role in the strength of another vital ministry and that this church has a strong emphasis on evangelism.

Of course church is more than worship. Redeemer is remarkable in what else happens in the life of this varied congregation. The bulletin lists staff who can be contacted for those interested in mercy and justice, congregational life, family ministries, fellowship groups, a counseling center, outreach, and stewardship. One of the ministries, The Center for Faith and Word, features fellowship groups in various slices of city work life. Arts groups include an actors’ group, a dance industry group and a culture club. Vocation groups include the A.D. agency for those in Madison Avenue related fields, and a business fellowship. There is also an entrepreneurs fellowship. These ministries clearly embody Redeemer’s concise mission statement: “renewing the city socially, spiritually, and culturally.”

An astonishing ministry of Redeemer is their church planting outreach called “Redeemer City to City.” Since its founding, the church planting center has helped to plant over 170 churches in 35 global cities. The ministry model draws from Redeemer's experience as a church in a secular, multicultural global city. The center provides resources, including funding, leadership training, and coaching, for churches in North America, Europe, Latin America, Asia and Australia

Redeemer describes their approach as being strongly based in the Gospel. “Nowhere do we encounter more opportunities to apply the gospel in these ways than in the city. Many modern urban dwellers face loneliness, economic hardship, social injustice, and personal and societal brokenness. The church is to serve all of these needs, including directly serving the poorest and most vulnerable populations in the city. We are dedicated to training leaders and planting churches that are committed to strengthening the influence of the gospel in the city in ways that result in spiritual growth, the flourishing of neighborhoods, reconciliation between classes and races, and the renewal of family life, education, health, and vocation.”

The church is currently posting a position called “Church Planting Catalyst for New York City.” The job description notes that the church is “seeking an experienced, visionary urban church planting leader to direct its efforts in New York City, with a goal of facilitating 100 new congregations during the next decade.” Congregational developers have long noted the importance of vision and compelling purpose in transforming existing churches and starting new ones. Redeemer does not lack for that.

Some might question why this newsletter, and last month’s, did not feature United Methodist Churches. There are certainly many of them doing wonderful ministry. Those highlighted here happen to be those I have personally encountered within a short time prior to writing. Of more importance, these churches are doing remarkable ministry in places where others have not fared so well. Seattle and New York are among the least churched cities in the US and yet these ministries have not only done well, they have gone over the top.

The two churches noted last month, City Church in Seattle and Brooklyn Tabernacle in New York, along with Redeemer Presbyterian are reaching more people, younger people, and more diverse people. They are doing it with excellent music, strong preaching, an emphasis on evangelism, a love for their context, and a driving sense of vision and purpose. All churches can strive to improve in these areas and may be pleasantly impressed with the results.

Rev. Dr. John H. Southwick, editor
Director of Research and Executive Secretary for Rural and Urban Networks
General Board of Global Ministries
New York, NY 10115

Halloween UMC Story

Does anyone else find it humorous that the Bishop's met on Halloween? The lead sentence of uncertainty about the answers and questions related to restructuring is certainly curious. If the bishops don't know, or have opinions, on this subject... well, it's just a strange Halloween story! I wonder, beyond the official press release, what those meetings are like.

I love that the bishop from Zimbabwe reminded the group they were meeting in the region where Francis Asbury so actively established the church. Please remind us more about such a heart for growing the church. As I said yesterday, some of our churches are doing exceptional work for the Kingdom of God and we should celebrate the good that is occurring in UMC ministry.

I also appreciate that Goodpaster spoke to some of the ecclesiology and theology lacking in the CTA. It seems to me that the historic Methodist emphasis on the annual conference ought to be worthy of more discussion as we return to our roots. Further, given the global nature of United Methodism prioritizing the conference would allow us to create basic discipline and structure that could be implemented and useful internationally. An emphasis upon the annual conference continues to be the wise Methodist approach that can serve us well in the future. Of necessity this will call for a realignment and retooling of our approaches of the last 30 years that places too much weight on agencies, on bishops being out of the conference, and upon United Methodism in the United States. Consolidation of the agencies makes great sense IF they work together for all annual conferences. I see no reason to establish any super council, a bishop with oversight of the denomination, or anything that detracts from our historic Methodist approach with emphasis upon conference and church.

As we continue the discussions and prayers leading to GC 2012 it will be good to focus on the essentials of Methodism and move the conversation beyond Halloween toward All Saints.

Future of Seminary Education

Here's an intriguing dialogue about the future of seminary education. I found the 9 articles of the "featured content" of online symposium useful reading. I was rather surprised that the featured presenters were all Anglo. The future church and future clergy are bound to be more diverse than that if we are doing our job and preparing for the next generation!

UMC Millenial Leaders

I read an interesting blog today about the Millennial generation but had MANY questions. I'm curious if those of you in that age bracket would agree with these ideas, or if this is more a Catalyst culture millennial insight. It read to me as if they had a brainstorming session with a few people over lunch and made up a somewhat random list.

If you are a millennial clergy, or in church leadership of some sort and a millennial, I'd especially be curious about your thoughts as your generation interacts with older leadership. What do you millennials say? As is often the case when I read a broad discussion of a generation I admit I'm somewhat skeptical. You folk born after 1980 could help me with your clarifications and additions to the list below. I do want to learn more about what it means for the millennials to step into leadership and how we might best engage that age group.

The full post, 20 Points on Leading Millenials, is here. I've edited down to the main points and then included my thoughts or questions in italics.

A good friend asked me the other day my thoughts on how to lead the millennial generation, basically those born after 1980. We gather thousands of leaders who fit this category on an annual basis, and most of our Catalyst staff are under the age of 30.

I have to admit- I don’t always get this right. As a 100% Gen X’er, my tendency is to lean away from several of these points, and lead how I’ve been led over the years by Boomer and Busters. But I’m working on it…. What are comparable business environments using large numbers of millenials and creating this sort of dynamic illustrated below? Is it Google, Facebook, etc. or some other business? Any churches or ministry groups with a crowd that age doing this?

So with that said, here you go, thoughts on leading millenials:

1. Give them freedom with their schedule. I’ll admit, this one is tough for me. What does this mean?? How does this work? What does it look like?

2. Provide them projects, not a career. Career is just not the same anymore. They desire options. Just like free agents. Interesting... but refer to my questions in #1 and give some specifics.

3. Create a family environment. Work, family and social are all intertwined, so make sure the work environment is experiential and family oriented. Everything is connected. This often works well in ministry, but then sometimes the demands of ministry demand the attention. What does "experiential" work mean?

4. Cause is important. Tie in compassion and justice to the “normal.” Causes and opportunities to give back are important. This is easy enough to do with ministry though sometimes this constant is a challenge. What is the typical life span of a millennial doing Catalyst work?

5. Embrace social media. it’s here to stay. Okie dokie, that makes sense.

6. They are more tech savvy than any other generation ever. Technology is the norm. XBOX, iPhones, laptops, iPads are just normal. If you want a response, text first, then call. Or DM first. Or send a Facebook message. Not anti calls though. K

7. Lead each person uniquely. Don’t create standards or rules that apply to everyone. Customize your approach. (I’ll admit, this one is difficult too!) I'm curious on this one. Are you talking about more than personality differences? How does this work in a large organization?

8. Make authenticity and honesty the standard for your corporate culture. Millenials are cynical at their core, and don’t trust someone just because they are in charge.
The 1st sentence makes perfect sense. Re the 2nd- Really, how cynical? What does this mean re. supervision?

9. Millenials are not as interested in “climbing the corporate ladder.” But instead more concerned about making a difference and leaving their mark. Is this true for the whole generation? I know some folk that seem to be fairly adept at climbing the ladder! HOW do folk want to "make a difference and leave their mark?" I don't see the generation geared to this unless you mean something different than what I understand in the statement.

10. Give them opportunities early with major responsibility. They don’t want to wait their turn. Want to make a difference now. And will find an outlet for influence and responsibility somewhere else if you don’t give it to them. Empower them early and often. I actually find this to be one of my favorites on the list. How might a ministry organization or denomination best do this?

11. All about the larger win, not the personal small gain. Young leaders in general have an abundance mentality instead of scarcity mentality. What do you mean by this? Give an example of what this could mean in a ministry.

12. Partnering and collaboration are important. Not interested in drawing lines. Collaboration is the new currency, along with generosity. This is awesome if we are going to tackle some big issues of the day.

13. Not about working for a personality. Not interested in laboring long hours to build a temporal kingdom for one person. But will work their guts out for a cause and vision bigger than themselves. I like this thought but not sure what it means in relation to #1 &2.

14. Deeply desire mentoring, learning and discipleship. Many older leaders think millenials aren’t interested in generational wisdom transfer. Not true at all. Younger leaders are hungry for mentoring and discipleship, so build it into your organizational environment. Please give an example of what you mean and what this looks like.

15. Coach them and encourage them. They want to gain wisdom through experience. Come alongside them don’t just tell them what to do. This is potentially anther favorite though I do have significant questions. What does such an apprentice model look like in your ministry or work? Does this mean, similar to the rec department with kids, that everyone needs a trophy and "atta boy" for each project? If they want to be handed responsibility and we are to treat each person uniquely what does that style coaching look like in Catalyst or with millenials? How would any of this be different than a previous generation?

16. Create opportunities for quality time- individually and corporately. They want to be led by example, and not just by words. What is "quality time" in this context? Give an example

17. Hold them accountable. They want to be held accountable by those who are living it out. Measure them and give them constant feedback. What does it mean to give "constant feedback" at Catalyst? What is the ratio of supervisors to workers? What does this look like in other ministries or workplaces that have a high concentration of millenials?

18. They’ve been exposed to just about everything, so the sky is the limit in their minds. Older leaders have to understand younger leaders have a much broader and global perspective, which makes wowing Millenials much more difficult. Again, I'm drawn to this one but not sure I'm getting it all. What do you mean? What does this look like in the workplace?

19. Recognize their values, not just their strengths. It ain’t just about the skillz baby. Don’t use them without truly knowing them. This is another one I appreciate yet have some questions about. Is this that bridge between personal and professional as mentioned above? For some reason "The Office" just flashed in my mind! Do you do this both formally and informally? Asked another way, does personnel or human resources evaluations do this? I'd love to see an example of that eval form!

20. Provide a system that creates stability. Clear expectations with the freedom to succeed, and providing stability on the emotional, financial, and organizational side. Again, what does this mean and what does it look like?

Thanks to the Catalyst team and our band of millenials for their input and advice on these points. James Wilson, Julianne Graves, Sabrina Esposito, Alyssa Raymer, Stan Johnson, and Ansley Lawhead. You guys provided great insight!

If any of this crew can speak to my questions that would be really helpful!

Blogs of the Week-- Theology Edition

Nothing but challenge and trouble today!

United Methodist Theology

The Problem of Beth Moore

How interesting that after some of my recent blogging I found similar thoughts at Biblical Mission Strategy

Discipleship

Discipleship 2

UMC Districts Are the Solution

I'm continuing to think about a contextually appropriate Methodist Christian mission. And I'm continuing to study that troublesome John 4 passage. Who, in their right mind, would start a Samaritan ministry so early. So, here goes the trouble that's percolating with me these rainy Georgia days.

How does a United Methodist annual conference, or more specifically a district, go about planning for the future of its mission and ministry?

Some clarifications are in order.

I'm a "company man" in many respects and therefore not just trying to cause trouble. Really, I like strategy, love theology, and believe that the stories of faith in the Bible are still being played out today. Add a little Holy Spirit in the mix and I know that God continues to want us to let the Kingdom and His will be done on earth, and even in our denominations!

As I think about this contextually appropriate ministry I don't merely mean a district superintendent, or district committees, that "hand down" from the main office what the clergy and churches are supposed to do. We've proven this doesn't work, that the incentive isn't high, and that while we'll all put on the "game face" that none of us get excited about this institutional game that is so far removed from the work of the Kingdom. We've all been to mandatory meetings that are composed of the same annual business, the same reports, and the same "encouragements and reminders" that neither excite us for mission of the Kingdom or better equip us for leadership in following Christ and helping others to follow Him today. I'm wondering about a denominational approach that is beyond the institutional with strong local impact in mind.

Nor do I mean those district committees where we sit around talking about what we want to offer this year based on the same models and approaches we've used the last 30 years. Now, don't get me wrong I'm not just being ugly because I'm one of these folks and often in the meetings! But I know myself, group think, and institutional approaches well enough to know we get locked into routine rather easily. And the year becomes the decade becomes the career of such things before we know it. Rather, I'm thinking of the ways stronger congregations have a visioning process with focus on mission and ministry particular to their context of demographics, calling, location, and work of the Kingdom here. Such a planning process in a more aggressive, ministry motivated church will often chart a course for the next 5-10 years of impact. Why aren't annual conferences and districts as missionally motivated? It seems a great way to better know the churches and communities, and thereby make better appointments to achieve the goals. UMC districts are in a key missional strategy position yet are severely underutilized in most cases.

Recent conversations and thinking about the Kingdom of God and new ways of being a denomination have me curious about the application, approach, and leadership necessary for a vibrant UMC district. Note that a LOT of the conversation heading toward GC 2012seems to be on annual conference or congregation. I sincerely hope we don't leave out the neglected district. A strategy of renewal and reform MUST engage strategy and leadership in the UMC district!

Let me get rather pointedly specific and use the Augusta District of the North Georgia UMC as a brief case study.

If you don't know us we are a large geographic district, primarily rural, stretching from Augusta to Milledgeville, Greensboro, and Washington. Here's a map of the churches in the
Augusta District UMC. You can see it spans 11 large counties (and may even sneak across a county line somewhere to include another county). I've served this district since 1994 and still think of myself as a missionary here! We are somewhat detached from the annual conference as we are very unlike metro ATL and retain a distinct middle GA approach to life. Some clergy, OK maybe many, would see an appointment in Augusta District as a problem. Yet some clergy love the people, the churches, and the great opportunities here. You'll find 70 congregations and a few other UMC related ministry settings in the district. Many of these counties are stable to declining, and in recent years continue to see that drain of young families leaving for more favorable economic and educational options elsewhere.

Note these reported Church Membership numbers reported in 2010 and that many of the smaller congregations didn't show a count. Of course, actual worship attendance averages would be less in most cases, half would you guess on a regular Sunday? Yet, to me, this is like a roll call of all those towns and locations you might think of as familiar, as home.

Aldersgate 992
Ararat 38
Asbury 150
Barton Chapel 63
Berlin 134
Blythe 33
Boneville 33
Burns Memorial 291
Central 36
Cokesbury 261
*Covenant 146
Dearing 62
Dunns Chapel 65
Eatonton 859
Friendship 120
Gracewood 116
Greensboro 798
Grovetown 132
Harlem 530
Hephzibah 239
Hopewell 198
Lewis Memorial 863
Liberty/Greene Co 165
Liberty/Hephzibah 218
Lincolnton 307
Macedonia 205
Mann Memorial 251
Martinez 295
Marvin 429
Mesena 105
Milledgeville 1051
Mize 319
Montpelier 122
*Mosaic 293
Mt. Hope 10
Philadelphia 152
Pierce's Chapel 10
Pierce Memorial 146
*Quest 263
Riverview 178
Shiloh 163
St. James 254
St John 611
+St Mark/Marks Church Road 58
St Mark/Washington Rd 579
St Paul 133
Salem 20
*+Transformation 170
Trinity on the Hill 2546
Thomson 825
Walker 225
Warrenton 172
Washington First 349
Wesley 2735
Wesley Chapel 140
White Oak 36
Woodlawn 438
Young Memorial 128

+denotes predominantly African American congregations. While some congregations may have some diverse ethnicity's represented there aren't really any multiethnic congregations at this stage. It is noteworthy that there are 2 cross racial appointments with African American clergy serving predominantly white congregations at Marvin UMC and St. Luke.

*denotes new church starts less than 10 years old. 3 are in growing, suburban Columbia County while Transformation is in stable/declining Richmond County. The factors in urban Richmond County are radically different than the rural situations.

It's obvious that some of these congregations will close in the next decade. Yet, how will Methodism continue to share the Good News throughout the district? Will we create new partnerships among locations? return to earlier forms of circuits or pastor sharing? or develop something new and exciting which helps us to continue ministry through the district?

If you look at the demographics for these counties the UMC efforts continue to be "out of tune" with middle Georgia reality. Most of the counties represented in the Augusta district, with the exception of Columbia County, have significant African American populations. I've always heard that we've left it that way due to some agreement, whether formal or informal I don't know, with the AME and CME churches that we wouldn't establish African American congregations. Thus, Augusta/Richmond County continues in an awful spiritual decline as we do not share the gospel with the whole community and as UMC congregations fail to share the gospel with the next generation of workers and leaders who will fill the pews.

In Augusta/Richmond County the population is 201,949 with an African American population of 107,369. Yet, on any given Sunday, the United Methodist Church probably has only 200 African American brothers and sisters in worship! The spiritual segregation once spoken of as confined to the hour on Sunday has now pervaded the entire community. The younger generation of African Americans have left the historic black churches and now neither the African American congregations nor the white congregations have a voice. What does this say about our mission and ministry in the community? What does this say about our future in Augusta? How can we create a new multi ethnic reality that better mirrors the schools, the malls, the community?

If you dig into the statistics you'll quickly see that I'm not exaggerating about the present dilemma. 43% of families in Richmond County are single parent. You may also know that single parent homes tend toward poverty and myriad issues and challenges which are related to these factors. Add to this that our area has higher than state average for folk never married. The stats don't break out what percentage lives together versus truly always single, but you get the idea. 17,000 families (over 20%) fit that category of struggling city center or "urban grit." While 45% of Augusta/Richmond County considers themselves a spiritual person only 18% think it's important to attend religious services.

There are some very natural bridges here for Methodist style mission and ministry if we mobilized our resources and dreamed with God what the Kingdom might look like in Augusta. What dynamic Wesleyan style ministries could reach out to such folk if we were intentional, and had a concerted denominational effort in ministry? These are the sorts of important efforts which DON'T take place if a DS isn't missional, if districts merely do institutional business as usual, or if an annual conference doesn't engage in strategic ministry approaches in each district.

Don't even get me started on clergy who spend their career in metro ATL or merely pass through a district on their way to a "better appointment" nor on bishops who don't know a district in enough depth to give leadership. But, again, it's the system we've built together. The question isn't so much where we have been, but where we will go from here.

So, some mission questions, as I continue to find myself in a questioning mode these recent weeks:

Who is in charge of the missional/evangelistic/church strategy for UM's to reach a district? a conference? Is there such a strategist?

What directions would we go if we were more aggressive in strategy? What churches will close & what new efforts will be employed? What clergy should deploy here as best matches for the mission? What funding do we redirect so that district, churches, new church starts, Wesley Foundations, and the mission of the district is all on the same page for the next 5-10 years?

I'm convinced that UMC Districts are a driver in the future of the UMC, but we've got to be more aggressive, we've got to be more strategic, and we've got to have the right people in leadership if we are to embrace the Kingdom which is seeking to grow in Augusta.

New Christian Movements

I've recently been talking with a "native" missionary about new Christian movements in his homeland. While in past centuries we might send a missionary from England or the U.S. to locations all over the globe, now we find leadership is best developed "in country." The person may study elsewhere, but intentionally returns to their native land. Rather than send a white missionary who would be high cost (of time and energy to learn new language and new culture, plus the annual costs of such a person or family) and high risk (ever wondered how many missionaries make it more than 5 years? how fluent could anyone become in a language and culture in 5 years? does the outsider do more harm than good?), the movement has been toward developing culturally appropriate investment in leadership.

My missionary friend is a leader with "contextually appropriate" Christianity in his nation. No one is content with merely adopting western Christianity methods, values, and approaches. Instead, how is the Kingdom expressed, the Scripture shared in the language of the people, and the way of Christ lived out in ways that make sense to the tribe or people or culture. For instance, does a sermon or study illustration of baseball make sense in the land of cricket? Is Sunday School mandatory in a place that might find other educational and small group approaches appropriate? Would you build a large building for every "church" (i.e. gathring of believers) or might some other forms of gathering for worship and study be most appropriate?

Imagine a place that is perhaps 2.5% Christian with a long tradition of another major religion and subcultures galore. Think of large crowds and basic preaching and teaching. Imagine a pervasive poverty and as you piece this together you get better views of the life of missionaries all over the world. Think of the early days of Christianity, or pre-denomination, and you get the picture of some of his work on the frontier.

We had a fascinating conversation pursuing this topic of "new missions" which makes use of "local wisdom" and engages in a new partnership beyond the old colonial approaches. Unfortunately the old denominational approach handed down by the colonial powers in Africa and Asia has succeeded, in many places, in merely handing down a systemic corruption and weak church which is in decline. He said that one problem of the denominations in his country is that they have trouble because they have too much property! The old line churches can't attend to the spiritual and respond to the work of God in appropriate ways in that setting as they must keep up with the buildings, the administration, the programs, and the financing of the institutions.

Now, this guy isn't a negative, gloom and doom type by any means, but is a thoughtful leader in both the national and international movement of Christianity. As we spoke my mind spun with the implications both there and here.

Some countries and some movements in Christianity are "coming into their own" now as they enter the 30-50 year time period after power has been handed over. Not all escape the "colonial hangover," and exciting things are happening as a contextually appropriate Christianity emerges. Now this is not without difficulties as my missionary friend expressed both the highs and lows of this emerging movement. Some of what he described sounded like the churches in the earliest days that Paul addressed in some of his New Testament writings. One challenge has been the importation of the "prosperity gospel," which in a land of poverty is an alluring message that can draw a crowd and detract from the Christian message. The challenge is to express an incarnational Christian message, in word and deed, that is appropriate to a culture or subculture and which helps the Kingdom of God to come alive today. So, my friend looks for "redemptive analogies" which connects the words of Scripture with his context so that people might respond to the true Good News.

This isn't a new partnership, and we'll continue to explore what it means to be intentionally interdependent as we express what it means to be the Body of Christ which breaks through nationality and culture. These MUST BE the most exciting days to be alive and work in the Kingdom as God seems to be doing so many new things!

P.S. I've been studying John 4 this week.

Does $ Solve Everything for a Denomination?

What would happen to your denomination if you received $1.5 billion with strings attached? Would it help you accomplish your mission?

That's the intriguing drama being played out with the Salvation Army and the communities which have received KROC Centers. The original plan from the Joan Kroc estate envisioned 30 KROC Centers around the US as community centers affiliated with the Salvation Army. The receiving community would need to raise half the funds and then be matched by KROC. See the 2006 story from a philanthropy perspective. The NY Times offered this update in 2009 as the economy struggled and some metropolitan areas gave up on the projects for lack of community funding support.

The nearby Augusta GA KROC Center broke ground February 2010 and held their grand opening August 2011. They are situated in the old mill village of Harrisburg. It's a neighborhood in town often in the news for one problem or another. The KROC Center has an impressive building with an incredible array of programming. Here are the early numbers from 2009 regarding the projected impact and later explanations to the public . Despite the media coverage there still seems be be some confusion even today. Questions still remain whether KROC is intended for the local neighborhood, which also houses the Salvation Army, and will meet the needs of the poor of that community. I've noticed many recent Facebook posts for our Augusta branch reminding everyone that SA is a church. That seems to somehow have gotten lost in the excitement. Will folk be as excited as KROC rightfully presses the church aspect of their agenda?

But back to my initial question. How does a ministry/denomination that seems to specialize in serving the poor and those hit by disaster juggle a programming approach to ministry using a community center/recreation approach and keep their focus? The local effort will soon unveil their First Stop social service approach as they gather various partners to meet the needs of the poor. But how will the poor and those needing social services mix with the middle class and those served by the community programming of KROC? Most church ministry attempts at this take a stronger lead with the spiritual component to help integrate various socio-economic or ethnic groups. Of course, we all know that recreation is a great and easy place to gather a great mix of people. Perhaps the program approach taking the lead is a good solution.

Across the U.S., and even here in Augusta, many of us are watching to see how the millions and billions of dollars from the KROC Foundation will impact the mission of the Salvation Army. The next year will be interesting as these answers will soon be revealed for the Salvation Army, our local KROC Center, and Harrisburg.

The Gospel of the United Methodist Church

I've just started reading "The King Jesus Gospel" by Scot McKnight. OK, I'm really only on the first chapter. Already he is pushing some worthy issues to consider, e.g. allowing Scripture to define gospel, wariness of our own interpretations and theological bias, and wrong views of gospel. I would guess the typical reader would be identified as "evangelical" so it will be curious to see what the response will be. I'm not sure where he ends up in his writing, but I'm already finding this a useful exercise and reflection upon the biblical gospel, my gospel, and the gospel of the church.

McKnight writes, "I believe the word gospel has been hijacked by what we believe about 'personal salvation,' and the gospel itself has been reshaped to facilitate making 'decisions.' The result of this hijacking is that the word gospel no longer means in our world what it originally meant to either Jesus or the apostles."

Then he gets to the heart of it all:

I believe we are mistaken, and that mistake is creating problems we are trying to solve. But as long as we remain mistaken, we will never solve the problems. Our system is broken and our so-called gospel broke it. We can't keep trying to improve the mechanics of the system because they are not the problem. The problem is that the system is doing what it should do because it is energized by a badly shaped gospel.

WOW...

I'm eager to see what he does with this as the springboard thought is that the "so-called gospel is deconstructing the church."

It makes me wonder, what is the gospel of the United Methodist Church? Might a strong, shared understanding and application of biblical gospel by denomination, laity, clergy, local church and annual conference be the remedy to our problems? What would the implications be if we allow God to deconstruct our thoughts, our institutions, our conferences and congregations, and reconstruct the Church?

Share your thoughts on gospel and church, and look for more on this as I'm challenged by McKnight and by the biblical gospel.

Confusing the Kingdom of God and the Church

It's funny how blogs work. Often I get interested in a topic and then end up following the links from one blog to other blogs and articles.

Yesterday Ed Setzer had a blog on what it means for the Church to be missional which he portrayed in the 3 dimensions of missionary, mission, and the missio Dei. See the full article at Seeing Missional in 3-D-- A First Draft. Much of the discussion is a recap of the 20th Century Missionary movement, including the World Missionary Confernces with origins at Edinburgh in 1910 & then the important early meeting of the International Missionary Council in Tambaram (Madras), India in 1938. Setzer says,

The Tambaram conference called the whole church to be the bearers of the Gospel in every sphere of life.[5] In other words, mission is not to be a subdivision of the church’s life; it exists to accomplish a divinely ordained mission and the accountability rests upon every Christian in and outside of the church.

Setzer notes there were detractors. Most notable was the rhetoric of the Methodist missionary E. Stanley Jones. "He immediately questioned this emphasis on the church in missionary thinking, fearing that the substitution of the church for the Kingdom of God might fleece the missionary movement of the 'needed fires of imagination, enthusiasm, and self-criticism.'[6] He continued, 'Madras looked out and saw the Kingdom and the Church at the door, opened the door to the lesser and more obvious, the Church, and left the Kingdom at the door. So Madras missed the way.'[7]"

I had to know more and followed the footnotes!

The main conclusion of the Madras Conference was that church and mission are inseparable. It said, "World evangelism is the God-given task of the Church. This is inherent in the very nature of the Church as the Body of Christ created by God to continue in the world the work which Jesus Christ began in His life and teaching, and consummated by His death and resurrection".35 It is the church that is God’s missionary to the world. So from Madras on, it was impossible to speak of mission without directly linking mission to the church. Further, in summoning the churches to become in itself the actualization among men of its own message, it appeared that Madras had identified the church with the Gospel. Hence the Conference at Madras could announce to a baffled and needy world that the Christian church was its greatest hope and that the church could not be destroyed. These were very bold and strong statements to make about the church and its place in the economy of salvation.

E. Stanley Jones, an American missionary working in India and a participant at the Madras Conference, immediately questioned this emphasis on the church in missionary thinking. He feared that the substitution of the church for the Kingdom of God might rob the missionary movement of the needed fires of imagination, enthusiasm, and self-criticism. From his experience in India as a missionary to the Hindus, he felt that the idea of the church was anathema to the Hindus. In an article for the Christian Century entitled, "Where Madras Missed its Way", he wrote:

In general the Madras Conference was great, but centrally and fundamentally the Conference missed its way. Why? Because of its starting point - the Church. It began there and worked Out all its problems from the Church standpoint. Hence the confusion and hesitancy. The Church is a relativism. At its best it is so. When you work out from one relativism to other relativisms in human affairs, the result is bound to be confusion... Alongside of the pseudo-absolutes of the race as in Nazism, the state as in Fascism, the class in Communism, the Madras Conference put another pseudo-absolute, the religious community, the Church.36

According to Stanley Jones, Madras had no absolute conception from which it worked out its main problems. In his view, Jesus worked out His thinking from the Kingdom of God. The Kingdom is God’s absolute order confronting human need. The Kingdom is absolute while the church is relative. The Kingdom is the end while the church is only the means. For Stanley Jones, one could not be a revolutionary in one’s thinking and acting, if one started from the church. Then the Gospel becomes a limited one. "The conception, the Church, binds you in relativities and limitations," he wrote. The complaint of Stanley Jones was that while Jesus went about preaching the Gospel of the Kingdom, Madras went about preaching the gospel of the Church. He wrote, "Madras looked out and saw the Kingdom and the Church at the door, opened the door to the lesser and more obvious, the Church, and left the Kingdom at the door. So Madras missed the way".37

.T.V. Philip, "Church & Mission"

Troublemaker Series: #3 UMC Clergy

I'm struck by the seeming lack of a "plan" in the New Testament and our denominational plans today.

Well, that's not quite right, as there was a plan. It was rather simple- depend upon God, follow the way of Christ, listen to the guidance of the Spirit, preach/teach/disciple everyone. Sure, you could add a few ingredients here and there, and certainly "flesh out" all of the above, yet you must admit the agenda is rather simple and straightforward. But while we hold to the place of Scripture we likely don't want to go too far in applying it in this discussion.

As I've blogged recently there's a lot of talk, words, meetings, etc. in the buildup to all the denominational meetings in 2012. You'll notice I'm not "hung up" on some of the hot topic issues of clergy (after all, I'm a deacon, so my only guarantee comes from God!). Instead, I think there are some other critical issues deserving of consideration and discussion that may get lost, yet are critical to not just the survival but a thriving United Methodist denomination.

I'm sure one issue the entire UMC will look at in GC2012 will be that of the role of clergy, DS, and bishop. To say it another way, the whole system must work together- especially the local congregation- if we are serious about a new era of vibrant Methodist Christianity. Too much of this discussion is being held at the "higher levels" and we are again failing to engage our UM congregations. That's a shame as it could be an opportunity to engage and deploy a United Methodist Army in a shared mission that is of the greatest importance and urgency!

Check out this job description for a pastor
. While I've served as clergy for a number of years (and still LOVE it!) I'm better recognizing that 1) while our jobs demand the ability to "spin plates" and multitask not everything can be a priority and 2) the more I focus on the most important things in ministry and in my giftedness for the Church the more effective I am. The more I focus on preaching/teaching, witnessing in word and deed, discipling/spiritual mentoring in honest, real, Methodist ways, the better I do long term in ministry. Said another way, I'm not called to "do it all" in the church, but to say yes to equipping and engaging the laity in ministry and allowing this power of God in the laity to be unleashed (as opposed to controlling, stifling, or otherwise impeding).

Some "Troublemaker" questions that I'm pondering:
--I'm wondering what the "poster child" of UM clergy looks like during the next 10-20 years? Think of the next generation of pastors after Adam Hamilton, Rudy Rasmus, Mike Slaughter, Kirbyjon Caldwell, etc. Think of those younger than Olu Brown, Hyo Kim, Nora Martinez, and John Kenney. Maybe a Susan Pinson, or David Walters, or Jasmine Smothers, or who? What of those young clergy who haven't yet responded to the call yet who are still in high school? What does that poster look like for the "average" UM congregation in 2021 and beyond?

-What should the 1 or 2 primary jobs be of United Methodist clergy? If, for example, it is preaching and one other ministry then we need to turn the whole system in that direction. How will we better retool seminary, conferences, board of ordained ministry, etc. for this new generation of clergy? Said another way, will we want 60 year old seminary professors who've never served a congregation teaching preaching to 25 year old students we expect to lead multi ethnic congregations that may be more evangelical with expertise in building bridges into a community? Will we work our denomination in smarter ways to use current technology to make the best use of time so clergy can focus on the priority?

-What should the 1 or 2 primary jobs be of a District Superintendent? If it is to be a missional strategist and clergy/church coach then the whole system should be oriented in that direction of primary focus. We can't merely tag a variety of people who reflect a conference yet lack the skills to do the job. If they can't fulfill the job then they can certainly return to the better position that matches their gifts for ministry. It's OK because sometimes you don't know until you try. In college football, sometimes you don't know if someone is better suited to play as first string quarterback until you put them into the game situation. While we should make wise decisions, and not get hamstrung by politics, we shouldn't be afraid to take risks as we follow the Spirit.

-What should the 1 or 2 primary jobs be of a bishop? 1) primary for me is leadership in the annual conference, and 2) limited time outside of conference with the larger Church. If they are ineffective, and just voted in on popularity yet lack the skills, will we return them to a position that they are better equipped to do? What is the role of a bishop to be effective in the new UMC? and how will that be evaluated?

-How will congregations reorient toward a new Methodism that must, of necessity, engage both clergy and laity? Excellent, engaging worship for this younger generation is an imperative. Serious outreach through mission and evangelism must be a priority. Becoming congregations that reflect our communities, i.e. multi ethnic, socioeconomically varied, must be a shared value and expectation. Congregational turnaround and ownership will be the deal breaker in all of this no matter the competency and commitment of clergy.

-All "agency" work would be directly related to congregational and other direct ministry (campus, chaplaincy, mission, etc.) and these ministry equippers would coordinate their work. They would also have expectations of effectiveness in ministry and would be lean and action orinted.

-How will we clergy learn better ways of communicating the Good News to the larger community? For example, I'm rather certain the way I learned to preach in 1988, while holding some principles that will still work, may likely not be the best way to communicate to folk outside the church today. Oh, and I keep thinking of people outside the church because at our best the message, theology, and practices of Methodism made connections with the work of God in the larger community.

These are exciting times for the United Methodist Church, and I'm talking about a lot more than guaranteed appointments and church metrics!

Varied Church Jobs-- from DCE to Missions

It's been a long week of consignment sale preparation. Thursday night is always the "pre-sale" for workers & friends, and our tradition has been that my wife and daughter go work that and I spend the evening with our youngest son. It's a good time to catch up with him, catch up with some of my "day job" that's gone unattended during the consignment preparations, and to get a little rest after 4 physical days with the two biggest days looming Friday and Saturday.

Oh, and I get to catch up on blogs and other web information I follow.

During my years working as a church program director I always liked to know what other churches were doing in ministry, who was hiring, and how they framed the job descriptions. It is amazing how much you can learn about the church in a few minutes with review of the job description and a check of their website.

Anyway, I still keep up with who's hiring and like to check out a few websites every now and then. It also helps me to help other deacons who like to know what's going on in the larger world of United Methodism.

A few interesting jobs tonight include:
-a DCE position,
- a Global Outreach job,
- an Evangelism position,
plus I've seen a variety of ministry opportunities with children, youth, etc. I don't know anything about these particular churches, but there could be some good options developing for some of you interested in working in the Church.

Almost United Methodist Almost Haiku

Even in Georgia there is a hint of fall in the air this week. Political campaigning is in full gear & with the economy, jobs, and general angst it's a season for many words. Of course, in these days just before the 10th anniversary of 9/11 the emotions are on a roller coaster ride. Thank goodness for some entertainment as college football season has begun. Add to this cocktail that the build-up in "conversation" about the UMC General Conference has begun.

So, emotions, battle, concise words, and UM thoughts all came to my mind this morning as I awoke.

Ever wake up thinking of a UMC haiku?

I thought some of this might be obscure for some readers, or that you might want to know the context, therefore the key words are linked to a source. I've also started the day off learning something new as the "kireji" or "cutting word" is a strong concept.

With a tip of the hat to John Wesley & begging for forgiveness for anyone who loves Japanese poetry, I offer you:

Almost United Methodist Almost Haiku

GC12 scarecrow-
CTA metrics dashboard
coming death tsunami

What Will the New United Methodist Church Look Like?

Change must occur, and will happen in some form, but what will it look like for a denomination of John Wesley?

As the United Methodist Church moves closer to the conferences of 2012 the discussions will take on more frequency and more fervor. But why? Will it be to save a denomination or to make our budgets work out, or will there be any deeper motivations? Will we be more motivated by the Weems "death tsunami," declining finances and need for adjustment, or some theology from days gone by that we bring back to life (or, better said, allow God to resurrect).

You should be reminded that I write this as a deacon with primary work in missions and evangelism. So, even as I jot some thoughts I'm amazed at how irrelevant much of this is to the international United Methodist Church! How often should we remind ourselves of the Methodist movement that is working with few frills?

That Methodist troublemaker, Donald W. Haynes, often gets my attention. How can one person so consistently have you in agreement with him one minute and then aggravated the next? But, I've got to confess I like that about him! In his recent A Look at Connectional Table Recommendations he emphasizes the necessary focus of the denomination upon congregational vitality. He reminds us of Trueblood's writing about church needing a base and a field, and the simplicity and power of that view is worth examination. When your base is too weak you certainly don't have the strength, energy, and inclination to go to the field! The call is to the field and it is likely we need to "replant" many of our congregations with new clergy and churches that are United Methodist for this generation. That also means we need to look for different types of clergy, and likely adjust our approach to clergy training and deployment. Of course, how many of our "old" Methodists understand what this will require and boldly take hold of God's hand in some new ventures? Is there a place for entrepreneurial, evangelical United Methodist clergy and churches? And how will the "old guard" and conference leadership respond to such things? I'm feeling more and more like the old guard myself! It makes me curious what decisions would be made if the General Conference was composed of a majority of 35-40 year olds reorganizing the UMC for a bold 20 years of ministry.

I've got to add to the Haynes discussion by simply saying that most of our current agencies do not know how to work with congregations. It's not an indictment of the people, but recognition that they are often far removed from "the field" and their days revolve around meetings, paperwork, and ideas. While agencies may be effective at working with annual conferences our agencies have a built certain cultures over the decades full of middle management who are not free to make decisions and processes that are slow and methodical in all the wrong ways. For instance, my church was trying to work through GBGM to help fund a missionary on the field, but must go to a more direct process as July funds we gave in response to a need would not be available to the missionary until September! That is too slow for mission and too slow for a congregation responding to a need in 2011! Please note there are always exceptions to a general rule or blanket statement & I'm thinking of a few specific people at GBGM, GBHEM, & GBOD. Yet, in general, our general agencies are generally well suited to 1972, but not to 2011.

I will offer an exception to Haynes' comments re. GBGM. I believe that while the thrust of his argument is correct the exception I see is occurring with Patrick Friday and the work of "In Mission Together." If that strategy for connecting congregations with missions is the new way of GBGM then we do have a strong potential for the success and growth of mission as an international denominational approach that does engage congregations. Note that such a congregational movement of mission, beyond slick posters and special Sundays, will be the only way forward if we are to get serious about reclaiming a Wesleyan evangelical mission strategy that becomes the heartbeat of our churches. Can one office in an agency become the protocol and strategy for an entire organization?

Related to Haynes' thoughts and the Recommendations, is anyone else bothered theologically and practically with a separation of mission from the rest of the Christian and church life? How do you separate missions from evangelism? from discipleship? from worship? This sort of segregation of the various disciplines of faith is what has gotten us in some of this trouble now. I prefer a stronger integration of these elements of the faith. Why can't we house the denomination, and all the offices, in one location? Why can't they interact, inform, encourage, and strengthen each other just as we must allow in the local congregation?

Let's keep the prayers and discussion going as we seek to be the Church God desires for our day, and as we determine what the UMC will look like for the next generation. My hope is we hand off a stronger denomination in better position to confess the Risen Christ in word and deed for the entire world. We just need the courage and power to take those risky steps as the Spirit leads us. Perhaps we'll also realize that even as change occurs we can live without some of the frills that we thought were norms for the UMC.

After all, couldn't our best days, our most faithful days, be ahead of us?

Blazing Saddle Methodists

I attended our annual district "set up" meeting Monday evening. I still laugh at the name of such a meeting! I'm in a large mostly rural district so we all commute to a central location so that almost everyone has a 45 minute drive to get there. Maybe I'll work up some thoughts on "set up" some other time. Since my calendar, at this point in the year is generally full 12-18 months out, I'm always amused at the important dates that are given for an event a month away! It will certainly be curious to see how the old ways of United Methodism fit into the Call to Action approach and expectations as the whole denomination appears to be moving toward a more efficient, production based approach to ministry.

When I got home I was vegging in front of the TV, flipping channels catching news and miscellaneous shows, when I found "Blazing Saddles." I don't think I've ever seen the whole movie, and this was a language edited TV version with interesting footnotes explaining elements of the historic classic movie from that distant cultural time (1974!). I was instantly drawn to the cast of old characters and was sucked into it for a few minutes. Blazing Saddles was the typical Mel Brooks spoof packed with all sorts of "inside jokes" based on the times and shared with the world.

I stalled at the movie just as Harvey Korman and Slim Pickens appeared. They made me laugh before there was even any dialogue because... well because they are comedic geniuses & I know to expect fun. You may recall that in the movie Korman was the evil Hedley Lamarr & Pickens was his helper Taggart. What caught me off guard was a reference to Methodists! I had to go to IMDB to see if I'd heard correctly or if somehow the "set up" meeting was merely boomeranging on me.

Remember the scene where they are plotting and Lamarr is telling of all the types of bad guys he needs for the plan to succeed? If you know the voices and mannerisms it's best for you to mimic Pickens and Lamarr as you read this!

Taggart: What do you want me to do, sir?
Hedley Lamarr: I want you to round up every vicious criminal and gunslinger in the west. Take this down.
[Taggart looks for a pen and paper while Hedley talks]
Hedley Lamarr: I want rustlers, cut throats, murderers, bounty hunters, desperados, mugs, pugs, thugs, nitwits, halfwits, dimwits, vipers, snipers, con men, Indian agents, Mexican bandits, muggers, buggerers, bushwhackers, hornswogglers, horse thieves, ..., train robbers, bank robbers, ...and Methodists.
Taggart: [finding pen and paper] Could you repeat that, sir?

Could you repeat that, indeed! What a strange thing to hear after a Methodist set up meeting!

It makes me wonder though-- do you know of other movies where Methodists are mentioned in the script? and what is the context? How are we portrayed? Share the movies you know & your thoughts on Methodists in the movies.

Charles Wesley on Mission

See how great a flame aspires, Kindled by a spark of grace!
Jesus's love the nations fires, Sets the kingdoms on a blaze;
To bring fire on earth he came, Kindled in some hearts it is,
O that all might catch the flame, All partake the glorious bliss!

When he first the work begun, Small and feeble was his day;
Now the word doth swiftly run, Now it wins its widening way;
More and more it spreads and grows, Ever mighty to prevail,
Sin's strong-holds it now o'erthrows, Shakes the trembling gates of hell.

Sons of God, your Saviour praise! He the door hath opened wide;
He hath given the word of grace, Jesu's word is glorified;
Jesus, mighty to redeem, He alone the work hath wrought;
Worthy is the work of him, Him who spake a world from nought.

Saw ye not the cloud arise, Little as a human hand
Now it spreads along the skies, Hangs o'er all the thirsty land;
Lo! the promise of a shower Drops already from above;
But the Lord will shortly pour All the Spirit of his love!