2024 Publications on Methodist Mission and Evangelism

As the year winds down, we are taking a moment to review scholarship on Methodist mission and evangelism from 2024. The following is a list of books and articles published since the beginning of the year by scholars in the Association of Methodist Professors of Mission, friends of the blog, and other scholars about topics related to Methodist mission and evangelism. Readers are encouraged to consult these sources for the latest in scholarship about Methodist mission and evangelism.

Peter J. Bellini, “John Wesley, the Almost Charismatic,” in Heirs of Pietism in World Christianity: The 19th to the 21st Centuries, edited by Wendy J. Deichmann & Scott T. Kisker (Wilmore, KY: First Fruits Press, 2024).

Brian J. Chalmers, Methodist Revivalism and Social Reform in the Paradise of Dissent 1838-1939 (North Melbourne: Australian Scholarly Publishing, 2024).

Paul W. Chilcote, “Charles Wesley and the “Peaceable Reign” of Christ,” Holiness 9 (2024).

Paul W. Chilcote, Cultivating Christlikeness: Loving as Jesus Loved (Nashville: Abingdon, 2024).

Paul W. Chilcote, The Fullest Possible Love: Living in Harmony with God and Neighbor (Nashville: Abingdon, 2024).

Paul W. Chilcote, The Quest for Love Divine: Select Essays in Wesleyan Thought and Practice (Cambridge: Lutterworth, 2024).

Paul W. Chilcote, “Songs of renewal: The language of renewal in the hymns of Charles Wesley,” The Journal of Religious History, Literature and Culture 10:2 (2024).

Sara Ashencaen Crabtree, An Historiography of Twentieth-century Women's Missionary Nursing through the Lives of Two Sisters: Doing the Lord's Work in Kenya and South India (New York: Routledge, 2024).

Taylor Denyer, “Ecclesiastic Empires: American Conflict and the UMC in Africa,” in Methodism and American Empire: Reflections on Decolonizing the Church, ed. by David W. Scott and Filipe Maia (Nashville: Abingdon, 2024).

Norma Dollaga, “The Diaconal Spirituality of Activism in the Philippines,” in Diaconal Studies: Lived Theology for the Church in North America, edited by Craig L. Nessan and Darryl W. Stephens (Oxford: Regnum Books International, 2024).

David N. Field, “Engagements with Non-British Cultures,” in The Routledge Companion to John Wesley, ed. by Clive Murray Norris and Joseph W. Cunningham (London: Routledge, 2024).

Benjamin L. Hartley, “John R. Mott amidst the students: Historical and missiological gleanings for today,” Missiology: An International Review (2024).

Benjamin L. Hartley, “The Problem and Promise of the Diaconate,” in Diaconal Studies: Lived Theology for the Church in North America, edited by Craig L. Nessan and Darryl W. Stephens (Oxford: Regnum Books International, 2024).

Arun W. Jones, “From courtesan to King: The conversion of Farzana,” Nidān: International Journal for Indian Studies 9:1 (2024).

Filipe Maia, Decolonizing Wesleyan Theology: Theological Engagements from the Underside of Methodism (Eugene, OR: Cascade, 2024).

David L. McKenna, Seeing All Things Whole My Calling to Fulfill (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2024).

Martin Mujinga and Onias Chagudhuma, “Meaning beyond symbols!: A theological interpretation of the Methodist Church in Zimbabwe’s logo,” Pharos Journal of Theology 105 (2024).

Eben Kanukayi Nhiwatiwa, By the Grace of God: My Life as an African Bishop (Nashville: Abingdon, 2024).

Joon-Sik Park, “The Worldwide Nature of The United Methodist Church: A Historical and Missiological Reflection,” in Methodism and American Empire: Reflections on Decolonizing the Church, ed. by David W. Scott and Filipe Maia (Nashville, Abingdon, 2024).

Angel D. Santiago-Vendrell, “Popular Catholicism Puerto Rican Style: The Virgin of Rincón, Human Agency, and Miracles,” Religions 15 (2024).

David W. Scott, “American Power in the Global Church in Ecumenical Methodist Perspective,” in Methodism and American Empire: Reflections on Decolonizing the Church, ed. by David W. Scott and Filipe Maia (Nashville: Abingdon, 2024).

David W. Scott and Filipe Maia, eds., Methodism and American Empire: Reflections on Decolonizing the Church (Nashville: Abingdon, 2024).

David W. Scott, “Review of Dana L. Robert, Allison Kach-Yawnghwe, and Morgan Crago, Creative Collaborations: Case Studies of North American Missional Practices,” Missiology, 52:1 (2024), 118-119.

Howard A. Snyder, Consider the Lilies: How Jesus Saves People and the Land: The Theology and Ecology of Salvation (Wilmore, KY: First Fruits, 2024).

Darryl W. Stephens, “Developing a Trauma-Informed Diaconal Praxis,” in Diaconal Studies: Lived Theology for the Church in North America, edited by Craig L. Nessan and Darryl W. Stephens (Oxford: Regnum Books International, 2024).

Darryl W. Stephens and Craig L. Nessan, eds., Diaconal Studies: Lived Theology for the Church in North America (Oxford: Regnum Books International, 2024).

Darryl W. Stephens, “A Global Ethic for a Divided Church,” in Methodism and American Empire: Reflections on Decolonizing the Church, ed. by David W. Scott and Filipe Maia (Nashville: Abingdon, 2024).

Darryl W. Stephens, Reckoning Methodism: Mission and Division in the Public Church (Eugene, OR: Cascade, 2024).

Darrell L. Whiteman, Crossing Cultures with the Gospel: Anthropological Wisdom for Effective Christian Witness (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2024).

Darrell L. Whiteman, Forward to Jerusalem Burning: The Terror and Promise of the "Wrath of Love," by Robert L. Canfield (Eugene, OR: Cascade, 2024).

Philip Wingeier-Rayo, “The Autonomous Process of Latin American Methodism: A Critical Review,” in Methodism and American Empire: Reflections on Decolonizing the Church, ed. by David W. Scott and Filipe Maia (Nashville: Abingdon, 2024).

Philip Wingeier-Rayo, “Latin America and the Caribbean,” in The Routledge Companion to John Wesley, ed. by Clive Murray Norris and Joseph W. Cunningham (London: Routledge, 2024).

Philip Wingeier-Rayo, “Review of In the Hands of God: How Evangelical Belonging Transforms Migrant Experiences in the U.S. by Johanna Bard Richlin,” Politics, Religion & Ideology 25 (2024).

Recommended Reading: Katelin Hansen on the ongoing ministry of deaconesses

Deaconess Dr. Katelin Hansen published an article on UMNews this week entitled "Deaconesses are still here - let's invest in them too!" In it, Dr. Hansen explains the ongoing mission and ministry that deaconesses and home missioners offer to the world through their service as an order of The United Methodist Church. She connects the historical roots of this mission and ministry with its present shape.

As part of that effort, Dr. Hansen offers a corrective to how some of that history was presented in Rev. Dr. Javier Viera's recent article on the mission and ministry of deacons, including its treatment of the Chicago Training School for City, Home, and Foreign Missions, one of the predecessor institutions to Garrett-Evangelical Theological Seminary. Several UM & Global readers, including Dr. Hansen, raised similar points in comments (public or private) on a previous UM & Global Recommended Reading piece calling attention to Rev. Dr. Viera's article.

Dr. Hansen's article is thus well worth reading both for its own highlighting of deaconesses and home missioners and as part of a larger conversation with Rev. Dr. Viera.

Recommended Reading: Javier Viera on Deacons

Rev. Dr. Javier A. Viera, President of Garrett-Evangelical Theological Seminary, published a recent commentary on UMNews entitled "To revitalize the church, we must invest in deacons." The piece is worth a read, as it intersects with themes from this blog in at least four ways:

1. Viera roots his reflections in the historical example of the deaconess movement and the Chicago Training School for City, Home, and Foreign Missions.

2. Viera is concerned with the missional nature of clergy, especially deacons, a topic that Ben Hartley has written about on this blog.

3. Viera is concerned with changing trends in the composition and supply of clergy. I have written several pieces in recent years on clergy supply.

4. Viera is concerned with the changing nature of theological education, which multiple authors have addressed on this site.

While many are likely to read Viera's piece in light of recent General Conference decisions on sacramental rights for deacons, as the above list makes clear, Viera's reflection on deacons connects to many and wide ranging issues in the church.

Philip A. Wingeier-Rayo: Puerto Rico and Cuba: Diverging Religious and Cultural Histories

A Cuba

Cuba y Puerto Rico son
de un pájaro las dos alas,
reciben flores o balas
sobre el mismo corazón

Cuba and Puerto Rico are
As two wings of the same bird,
They receive flowers and bullets
Into the same heart ...

Excerpt of a poem entitled “A Cuba” by Puerto Rican journalist and poet Lola Rodriguez de Tío

Recently, I had the opportunity to travel to Puerto Rico to visit historical Protestant churches. After serving as a missionary in Cuba in the 1990s, I was struck by both the uncanny similarities and stark differences between the two Caribbean islands. Obviously, the inhabitants of both islands speak Spanish, have similar food and music that are a mix of Spanish and African influences, and both cultures have a joyous warm enthusiastic Latin flair. 

Both islands were inhabited by the Taino tribe, a subgroup of the Arawak people of South America, before being colonized by Spain for nearly 400 years. Africans were brought as slaves to work on Spanish haciendas, or plantations, that produced sugar, rum, and tobacco that were exported back to Europe. 

The Roman Catholic Church was dominant on both islands until Protestant missionaries arrived following the Spanish-American War of 1898. Protestantism spread on both islands and built churches, schools, and hospitals that shared an expression of American Christianity. Both islands have vestiges of the Spanish American War with U.S. military bases: Guantanamo Naval Base in Cuba and Buchanan in Puerto Rico.

Cuba fought for its independence from Spain with several insurrections and slave rebellions during the nineteenth century, beginning with the “Ten Year War” from 1868-1878. The final push was led by José Martí, known as “The Apostle,” who founded the Cuban Revolutionary Party in 1892 to fight for independence. 

During their independence war, the U.S. feared regional instability and dispatched the USS Maine. It mysteriously exploded while anchored in the Havana Harbor on February 15, 1898, killing 267 sailors aboard and giving the U.S. a motive to intervene. The U.S. troops, known as the “Rough-riders” and led by Teddy Roosevelt, came to the aid of the Cuban insurgents and sieged a Spanish fort in Santiago on July 1, 1898 – known as the Battle of San Juan Hill. On July 25^th of the same year, the U.S. invaded Puerto Rico. The last Spanish troops retreated on October 18^th. 

Collectively known in U.S. history books as “the Spanish-American War,” the conflict ended with Spain relinquishing the rights to Cuba, and ceding the islands of the Philippines, Guam, and Puerto Rico to the U.S. in exchange for $20,000.

The U.S. President during the Spanish-American was William McKinley, a member of the Methodist Episcopal Church (MEC). At first, he didn’t know what to do with these new territories. McKinley shared his plans for the Philippines with the General Missionary Committee of the MEC:

“When I next realized that the Philippines had dropped into our laps I confess I did not know what to do with them…and I am not ashamed to tell you, gentlemen, that I went down on my knees and prayed Almighty God for light and guidance more than one night. And one night late it came to me this way—I don’t know how it was, but it came (1) That we could not give them back to Spain—that would be cowardly and dishonorable; (2) that we could not turn them over to France and Germany—our commercial rivals in the Orient—that would be bad business and discreditable; (3) that we could not leave them to themselves—they were unfit for self-government—and they would soon have anarchy and misrule over there worse than Spain’s was; and (4) that there was nothing left for us to do but to take them all, and to educate the Filipinos, and uplift and civilize and Christianize them, and by God’s grace do the very best we could by them, as our fellow-men for whom Christ also died.”[1]

A similar logic was applied to Cuba and Puerto Rico.

In coordination with President McKinley and the American military presence, Protestant mission boards signed comity agreements to coordinate their outreach in these new U.S. colonial possessions. Missionaries from the Methodists, Presbyterians, Episcopalians, and Disciples of Christ, among other denominations, such as the Lutherans, established churches, schools, and hospitals on the islands. The United Brethren Church of Christ articulated the task in Puerto Rico:

“To inaugurate a work that assures the Americanization of the island, similar to the work of welcoming individuals into the joys and privileges of being a Christian disciple… we should inaugurate schools that will reach hundreds of children who can be formed through these institutions in the responsibilities of being an American citizen.”[2]

Methodist missionary Sterling Augustus Neblett arrived in Cuba in 1902 and compared the U.S. military occupation of Cuba to Protestant missions: “The entrance of God’s messengers, who were few in number and who came to bring peace and safety to the Cuban people, was militant but not military.”[3] He also referred to the expansion of Methodism following the Spanish-American war as “occupation.”[4]

The mission work in Cuba was well organized and resourced. By the end of the first decade of Methodist missions, there were 33 preachers, 15 of them Cuban, serving in 32 churches with a total membership of 3,000 people.[5] The mission work in Puerto Rico enjoyed similar success.

In the early 20^th century, the history, culture, and religious contexts of both islands were amazingly similar. However, fast forward 100 years to the 21^st century, and the realities of both islands are night and day. Today, the religious and political contexts are very different. Puerto Ricans, who are U.S. citizens, tend to be politically progressive and vote Democrat, while Cubans, despite the Socialist government, tend to be more conservative—especially those who immigrated to the U.S. They tend to vote more Republican. Puerto Ricans tend to be more open-minded on social issues such as LGBTQ inclusion, while Cubans are more conservative. Ironically, Cubans tend to be pro-American, while Puerto Ricans are suspicious of the United States’ colonial past.

Even though both islands have very similar political and religious histories--both being colonized by the Spanish and the United States, the Puerto Ricans and Cubans today live in completely different social, political and religious realities. One would never guess that the islands are only 750 miles apart. Much of these differences stem from the islands’ different histories since the Spanish-American War.

Cuba was granted its independence through the Platt Amendment, passed by the U.S. Congress in 1903, which included the right for the U.S. to interfere in Cuban affairs. Today, Cuba is an independent nation, but it has been ruled by the Communist Party for the last 65 years following the 1959 Socialist Revolution led by Fidel Castro. Puerto Rico, on the other hand, is still a U.S. territory.

An example of the fate of two mission initiatives describes the differences between the two trajectories. MEC Bishop Warren Candler traveled to Cuba in 1898 to plan mission efforts. The following year, a Methodist school was established in Havana, which would eventually expand to a university known as Candler College. Similarly, Presbyterian missionaries John and Eunice Harris sailed to Puerto Rico in 1906 and established a polytechnical school. That school expanded to become InterAmerican University, which today has eight extension sites, in addition to the main campus in San German, and a total enrollment of 5,000 students. By contrast, Candler College was intervened by the Cuban government and is used as a public school today.

Religiously and culturally, both islands were heavily influenced by the Roman Catholic Church, and many people remain nominally Catholic today. There is also an underlying influence of African religions, such as Spiritism and Santería. This has been attacked by Catholics and Protestants alike as being demonic, but it has experienced a surge in recent years. 

The Protestant churches are strong in both islands, but there are stark differences. The churches in Puerto Rico do a lot of social outreach to the marginalized, while the Cuban churches tend to focus more on evangelization. This is due, in part, to the government restrictions on social services. The Cuban Socialist Revolution, allied to Soviet Russian, implemented an atheist constitution, which repressed religion in Cuba and created a decline in religious affiliation from the 1960s through the 1980s. Religious schools and hospitals were nationalized and are run by the state. 

In 1991, Cuba amended its constitution from an official atheist state to a secular state, and restrictions against church participation were eased. After the fall of the Soviet bloc, a religious revival began in Cuba, and a generation of young people, curious and spiritually hungry, converted to Christianity.

Recent comments about Puerto Rico in the news are a reminder that Americans in general and United Methodists in particular have a responsibility to understand the role of the U.S. and U.S. denominations such as Methodism in shaping the histories of Puerto Rico, Cuba, and other lands.

---

[1] This quote specifically referred to Philippines, but could be applied to Cuba and Puerto Rica, as well. General James Rusling, “Interview with President William McKinley,” The Christian Advocate 22 January 1903, 17. Reprinted in Charles Sumner Olcott, The Life of William McKinley, Volume 2 (New York: Houghton Mifflin, 1916), 109-111.

[2] Samuel Cruz, Masked Africanisms: Puerto Rican Pentecostalism (Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Co., 2005), 23

[3] Sterling Augustus Neblett, Methodism’s First Fifty Years in Cuba, Wilmore, KY: Asbury Press, 1976, 6.

[4] Sterling Augustus Neblett, Methodism’s First Fifty Years in Cuba, 6.

[5] La Disciplina de la Iglesia Metodista en Cuba, Havana, Cuba, v.

Recommended Reading: Filipino Bishops' Statements on Separatist Groups

In the last month, Filipino United Methodist bishops have issued two statements related to a new, breakaway group called the Filipino Evangelical Methodist Church. The new Filipino Evangelical Methodist Church is separate from the Global Methodist Church, which has also organized in the Philippines. The Filipino Evangelical Methodist Church does include GEMS (Grace Evangelical Methodist Sanctuary), a group led by former United Methodist bishop Pete Torio.

In a statement on August 4, active and retired United Methodist bishops in the Philippines called for "love," "peace," and "mutual respect" in the face of this new division. At the same time, they preached against "harmful actions or language," "speaking ill of one another, spreading misinformation, or undermining individuals or groups with different convictions," and "using social media to ... deepen the divisions among us." The bishops indicated respect for those who "follow their conscience in matters of faith and practice" but pledged to uphold the unity of the church.

In a second statement on August 23, the three active bishops noted that despite the new group, it is the continuing members of The United Methodist Church who are responsible for "the unity and integrity" of the UMC. They noted that only "bona fide members" of the UMC should serve in its leadership positions and participate in discussions of its future. This bishops closed with an affirmation of the future of the UMC in the Philippines and its mission and ministry.

Robert J. Harman: Evangelical Church Disciplines

Today's post is by Rev. Robert J. Harman. Rev. Harman is a mission executive retired from the General Board of Global Ministries and was ordained in the Evangelical United Brethren Church.

David Scott’s postings on the subject of the UMC Book of Disciple stirred me to do a little historical research into the origins of the book in the history of the Evangelical Association, a forerunner of the Evangelical Church and the Evangelical United Brethren Church, which is my denominational heritage. My source is Raymond Albright’s A History of the Evangelical Church (1942).

The concept of a published Discipline occurred to founder Jacob Albright thanks to his personal association with the Methodist beginnings in his eastern Pennsylvania home. Unsatisfied with the outreach among his German heritage population by the English-bred circuit riders of Methodism, he began recruiting his own German speaking preachers into his Evangelical Association, which was dedicated to mission on that cultural frontier.

The first Discipline of the Evangelical Association had a single purpose. Albright knew that the success of the church’s mission would depend solely upon the quality of its circuit riding preachers. They were recruited from among the house churches and camp meeting revivals he was conducting. They included those who responded to the spirit filled messages they heard in their native tongue but had no formal training in biblical studies or church history.

So, included in the first published Discipline in 1809, along with a general introduction to the Christian church and organizational rules for conducting General Conferences, was a key ingredient. The first order of business of each General Conference would be a required examination of the moral standard of every preacher newly recruited and already active in the connection. 

When English speaking evangelists began appearing in the ranks of preachers, the examination process was heightened. Soon sessions of the General Conference had to decide when and how much of the German speaking texts needed translation. The audience for such was the growing segment of second-generation families among German settlers as well as confronting the more rapidly growing English-speaking populations addressed by the evangelistic outreach of the circuit riders’ movement westward and into urban centers.

The bilingual project was slowed down by controversy in those General Conference sessions over who among the leaders of the Evangelical Association was qualified to make accurate translations. By 1830, the text of the Discipline appeared in both German and English.

Over time, the contents of the Disciplines expanded to include revised articles of faith and the naming of the sacraments of baptism and the Lord’s supper. The doctrinal standards emerged largely by borrowing from the Methodist Discipline, often adopting language on controversial themes such as Christian perfection. That was followed by new commentary on matters of Christian behavior. Details for electing bishops and appointing pastors (by presiding elders, no longer by Albright or successor bishops) were spelled out. Paragraphs on local church matters included election of class leaders, organization of Sunday Schools, and support for disabled pastors.

Statements on public issues were preceded by an overview of Christian social responsibility in the 1825 edition: To be “One in accord with Christian regulations to labor together with upright Christians for the building of His glorious kingdom on earth.” That was followed by personal guidance on temperance, tobacco, Sabbath, and dress in the text of the 1830 publication. And a profoundly prophetic statement addressed the impending leanings toward a civil war, stating: “We believe that war and the shedding of blood are incompatible with the Gospel and Spirit of Christ.” The Evangelical Church never sanctioned slavery.

In the growing reality of a developing bilingual or cross-cultural ministry, the priority of a publishing house emerged to corner official treatment of controversial subjects and offer uniform lessons for catechism and adult education. For the circuit riders on the frontiers, there was only room in their saddle bags for a Bible, a hymnal and a Discipline. Thus, those texts were their sole library, forging the foundation of faith presented to the adherents of a growing denomination.

The quest for finding the “relationship between discipline and discipleship,” as David Scott wrote in his essay, had early beginnings in this Evangelical tradition of our denominational heritage. As for success in applying “rules vs. norms and boundaries vs. ideals as ways of influencing behavior,” that effort awaits further inquiry.

Jefferson Knight: The Threat of the Global Methodist Church in Africa: A Call for Unity and Resistance

Today's post is by Jefferson B. Knight. Knight is the Director, Human Rights Monitor, LAC/UMC and Vice President, Men's Organization, Kakata-Farmington River District/UMC.

In recent years, a troubling trend has emerged within the religious landscape of Africa. The Global Methodist Church (GMC), a denomination that recently splintered from the United Methodist Church (UMC) in the United States, is aggressively campaigning across the African continent with a singular goal: to destabilize and dismantle the UMC. With millions of dollars at their disposal, the GMC’s actions raise significant concerns about their intentions and their impact on African communities.

The GMC has successfully recruited several key leaders from the UMC in Africa to assist in their mission, a move that threatens not only the unity of the church but also the very fabric of community life across the continent. Notably, Bishop John Wesley Yohanna, the former Bishop of the Nigeria Episcopal Area, has joined their ranks, lending credibility to an organization whose agenda is increasingly perceived as divisive and destructive.

At the heart of the GMC's campaign is a controversial issue: same-sex marriage. By framing their opposition to the UMC around this topic, the GMC seeks to exploit cultural sensitivities prevalent in African societies. However, it is imperative to understand that homosexuality is not an African issue—it is predominantly an American concern. Many of the challenges and debates surrounding this topic are rooted in Western contexts, and it is disheartening to witness the GMC impose its beliefs on African nations, where traditional values and norms differ significantly.

Since the conclusion of the General Conference and the subsequent endorsement of regionalization plan, the GMC has intensified its attacks on the UMC throughout Africa, targeting countries such as Liberia, Nigeria, and Zimbabwe. Their campaign has not been without consequences. In Nigeria, recent events revealed a coordinated effort to incite chaos and violence against UMC congregations. Similarly, Bishop Samuel Quire of the Liberia Episcopal Area was attacked by GMC sympathizers during one of his visits to the Gompa District UMC.

These acts of violence reflect a deeper, disturbing reality: the GMC is willing to resort to intimidation and aggression to achieve its goals. Such actions are unequivocally un-Christian and contradict the very teachings of love, compassion, and unity that lie at the heart of Christianity.

Furthermore, the GMC has attempted to delegitimize the UMC by making unfounded accusations, branding it as an “unbiblical” church that endorses immoral practices such as fathers marrying their daughters and mothers marrying their sons. These statements are baseless and serve only to sow seeds of discord among congregants. The GMC's tactics echo those of other organizations that seek to manipulate religion for their own power and control—a strategy all too familiar in the history of colonialism in Africa.

As Africans, we must stand firm against the encroachment of the Global Methodist Church and its divisive agenda. It is essential that we foster unity within the UMC and resist attempts to fracture our community. We must openly condemn the violence perpetrated by GMC supporters and reaffirm our commitment to the principles of peace, dialogue, and understanding.

The United Methodist Church shall stand firm in Africa, fortified by the promise of Scripture. As declared in Matthew 16:18-19, “And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you lose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

We stand resolutely in faith, believing that no scheme or evil plan aimed at undermining the UMC will succeed. Just as Christ proclaimed, our foundation is built upon His truth and love, and the forces that seek to destabilize us will be met with unwavering resistance through prayer, unity, and steadfast commitment to our mission. The authority bestowed upon us enables us to confront challenges with courage, knowing that we are supported by divine power. Together, we will uphold the teachings of Christ, ensuring that our church remains a beacon of hope, love, and resilience across the continent. The United Methodist Church is here to stay, and with God’s grace.

In conclusion, the Global Methodist Church poses a significant threat to the UMC and the broader African Christian community. Their tactics amount to a form of neo-colonialism that seeks to undermine local agency and exploit cultural differences for their gain. We must reject their agenda and work together to preserve the integrity and unity of our churches, ensuring that Africa's religious future remains firmly in the hands of its people. Let us embody the true spirit of Christianity—one of love, acceptance, and solidarity—and rise against this insidious threat.